Higher Education Equity Literature Database

Aim: Conference paper reported on findings from qualitative ethnographic longitudinal study investigating students' transitions with language and literacy as they move from high school to university level study. The paper also aims to provide language practitioners and enabling educators with 3 suggestions related to informing practice.
Procedure: Qualitative, ethnographic longitudinal study (Author 1's PhD study). Research followed the experiences of 11 students moving from A-level study into the first and second year of university. Students were tracked for 2 _ years.
Findings: Assessment is one of the main drivers of academic reading and writing. The study also found that there is a vast difference in the way that knowledge is treated in high school as compared to university level study. Three suggestions relating to practice are to:
1. Create and sustain pathways of meaningful dialogue between enabling educators and the faculties, with regards to the kinds of language, texts and assessments that are valued
2. Forge working partnerships with language practitioners to ensure that required reading and writing tasks and practices are comprehensible.
3. Explore the happy medium with assessment: to be congruent with undergraduate practices but no assessed writing without careful consideration.

Context: Outlines a politics of refusal (rather than resistance) to contemporary performative and neoliberal governance, based on 3 modalities of truth (Scott, 1996): the truth we tell ourselves, the truths told about us, the truths we tell to others. Argues that Foucauldian notion of "subjectivity is now a key site of political struggle" (p.1131) - with the individual as the site of power (and governmentality the 'vehicle' and 'point of application'), resulting in the issue "[being] one of a recognition of and engagement with relations of power" (p.1131) and the 'drama of the self and government'.
Theoretical frame: Foucault (truth, power, discourse, agonism); Butler (self/recognition)
Methodology: Essay
Discussion:
Truths told about us: Sites of 'veridiction' include performance reviews, school league tables, the REF. According to Foucault (1980), power demands truth; "nothing is true that is not the product of power", and truth is a 'system of exclusion' (see p.1132). Ball talks about the "silent coupling of knowledge and power" (p.1132) by which we value people and give them their 'worth'. This plays out as a numbers game (in terms of what constitutes valid truth in this neoliberal age): "The regime of numbers hails us in its terms, and to the extent we turn, acknowledge and engage we are made recognisable and subject" (p.1133). Questioning 'the truth' leads us to question our own ontological status (see Butler, 2005)
Telling truths about ourselves: draws on critical self-reflection by 2 teachers (in correspondence), using the lens of agonism, "a process of self-formation through engagement" (p.1135) - arguing against powerful 'truths' = act of self rearticulation; "this is the care of the self, the work of the 'politics of the self', a continuous practice of introspection, which is at the same time attuned to a critique of the world outside" (p.1136). One technique (according to Foucault) = art of self-writing = care of the self
The truths we tell others: parrhesia = truth-telling as an activity/ role. This articulates the problem of truth as the problem of the teller. For Foucault, truth-telling = based on four characteristics:
1) clarity of what the speaker believes
2) moral quality of the teller
3) duty to tell the truth
4) truth-telling as a form of criticism
"Parrhesia involves speaking boldly in the face of risk or danger, speaking plainly when there is a difference in power between the speaker and listener, speaking frankly even when it flies in the face of the prevailing discourses" (p.1138-9) = 'fearless speech', challenging 'the ensemble of rules' which attaches truth (see p.1140).
Politics of refusal: two refusals and two forms of risk - first refusal = 'double-headed', a "disengagement
or renunciation of our 'intelligible' self and a willingness to test and transgress the limits of who we are able to be, a constant engagement with 'what it would mean to exceed or go beyond oneself'" (p.1141). Refusal two = the categories/ norms that seek to represent us: "It is a rejection of comparison and improvement, and indeed of excellence" (p.1141). The first risk = perils of uncertainty and unsettledness; the second risk =exposing ourselves to ridicule and marginalization (p.1141)
Core argument: Neoliberalism = also a site of refusal

Context: The original manifestation of the WP policy agenda in the UK was the Aimhigher program, (2004-2011) and brought together a wide range of partners including universities, colleges, schools and training providers. With the reduction (2008) and subsequent termination (2011) of Aimhigher, there is now a more atomised approach with institutional WP activities forming the mainstay. Despite 15 years of WP policy in the UK, there is mixed evidence that progress is being made towards the original aims. While there has been steady growth in the proportion of young people receiving free school meals participating in HE, this can be largely accounted for by an overall increase in participation rate reflecting both a growing supply of HE places and an expansion in the pool of young people qualified to apply for those places.
Aim: To explore why there has not been stronger progress made towards WP goals, through the eyes of two generations of practitioner-managers.
Theoretical frame: none
Methodology: The underpinning methodology was mixed methods approach, with two strands:
Strand 1: Semi-structured telephone interviews with former directors from all nine regions of Aimhigher.
Strand 2: Online questionnaire involving quantitative and qualitative questions distributed to senior individuals responsible for WP policy and practice within English institutions in late 2014 (57 of 151 invited institutions participated).
Findings: What works in WP? Strand 1 respondents revealed that the Aimhigher period was marked by activities designed to raise aspirations. There was disagreement, however, about the purposes of raising aspirations, which some respondents seeing it as an end in itself, while others saw aspiration-raising in a reciprocal relationship with attainment. Strand 2 participants were confident in their programs' ability to increase knowledge, raise aspiration and challenge stereotypes about higher education, but they were much less confident about their programs' ability to raise attainment. A common pre-requisite for success identified in Strand 1 was the need to engage with young (primary school aged) participants, given the pervasive nature of educational disadvantage.
Activities described as successful by Strand 2 participants tended to have strong overlap with more traditional marketing and recruitment activities. These sorts of activities, however, may fail to influence to overall pool of students coming to university and instead simply re-allocate students already en route to university. 48% of Strand 2 participants felt that applications to their own institutions were more important to their institutions than applications to HE in general.
Who gets access to WP activities? Participants in both strands had concerns about deadweight and leakage (the ability or willingness of schools to identify the 'right' students). There was also concern expressed by Strand 2 participants about a move to using location-based indicators of low socioeconomic status (such as POLAR). 60% of respondents felt that increasing applications from a disadvantaged school or area would be considered a success by their institutions, regardless of the individual applicant's situation (i.e. leakage).
Evaluation. Overall, there was a lack of confidence about evaluation practices in the field, with 91% of Strand 2 respondents looking to improve their evaluation practices and only 10% reporting feeling confident in the evidence underpinning their activities. The most widely used forms of evaluation were pupil questionnaires, followed by time series analyses, teacher questionnaires and longitudinal tracking, interviews/focus groups were used on 'occasional' or 'rare' basis. Some participants were seeking to develop qualitative and case study techniques in order to answer questions about why particular activities were or were not effective. Strand 1 participants tended to report a shift over time towards a reduced array of activities that were easy to evaluate. Participants also identified that the closer they worked with schools, the more difficult it was to tease apart WP influences, particularly relating to attainment.
Core argument: One the one hand, evidence shows that a key determinant of HE participation is school attainment and that disadvantaged young people do not suffer from low aspirations. Despite this, the majority of institutions in this study reported focusing on aspiration-raising, with many seeing attainment-raising as explicitly outside of their remit. Further, the very modest progress towards WP aims may reflect an over-emphasis on securing applications from already high-attaining young people to the detriment of activities to increase the pool of those attaining highly, and this is particularly the case in elite institutions. Issues with targeting the 'right' students in WP programs have persisted for many years, possibly worsened by a move towards recruiting from particular areas rather than from lower socio-economic individuals specifically. In terms of evaluating the success of WP programs, there is generally an absence of a clear epistemology. This is partly because it is a complex undertaking (identifying what works in complex environments amid myriad confounding factors), and partly due to misalignments of epistemology (e.g. conflating monitoring with evaluation).

Context: Looked after children are a grossly under-represented group in Higher Education, with only 7% of care leavers entering HE. However, widening access initiatives to increase applications from and subsequent retention in care leavers has had mixed success due to their fairly generic nature and lack of focus on the specific needs of a looked after child. 'Success4Life' is a high-intensity widening participation project delivered by the University of Manchester for high school pupils in local authority care, with a particular focus on the transferable lifelong skills attendees develop and the way in which these will help the young learners throughout their education and careers more broadly. The programme seeks to develop positive self-image, confidence, presentation and teamwork skills, through a range of group work activities and themed sessions. Pupils work alongside positive role models (current University students, some of whom are care experienced) and University staff.
Aim: To describe the involvement and experiences of looked after children on the Success4Life programme and reflect on how the information gained may be used to positively enhance perceptions, to raise pupil aspiration, to provide reassurances that targeted support will be available during their time at university and most importantly to ensure that attendees can imagine themselves at University in the future.
Theoretical framework: Not specified in study.
Methodology: 2 phases of programme evaluation: Phase 1: Short feedback questionnaires (pre- and post): Pre-programme questionnaires (70/70 participants); Post-programme questionnaires -completed at programme graduation ceremony (63/70 participants). Both sets of questionnaires included a mixture of Likert-scale ratings (1-5) and qualitative (free-text) responses. Phase 2: Focus group interviews with six participants (after one month the project had ended).
Findings: Phase 1: Attendees reported an increased desire to stay in education after the age of 16 following the State- run General Certificate of Secondary Education exams (76% pre-project, 93% post-project), an increased intention to apply to university (85% pre- project, 97% post-project) as well as a greater awareness of university courses and options available to them (44% pre-project, 63% post-project). Phase 2: All cited extremely positive experiences from their participation: an increase in self-belief, discipline and confidence, having an open mind, developing communication and presenting skills and learning to be more considerate to others. Significant issue cited by participants: Lack of trust towards other participants.
Discussion: The extremely positive feedback suggests that the space and time provided by Success4Life is a chance for these vulnerable young learners to change their ways of thinking around behaviour, restructure modes of expression and carry realisations over into their behaviour in other contexts. Key aspects to programme success: one-to-one interaction with facilitators; intensity of the workshops in an emotionally secure and safe environment; encouragement of emotional awareness and self-regulation, impulse control, optimism, empathy and self-efficacy in the young learners.
Core argument: Success4Life is a successful WP intervention into the lives of the young people who are care leavers, making a positive and hopefully, lifelong difference to individual behaviours.

Context: UK higher education/ business school and student-centred approach to facilitating transition via 'Marketing Downloads' initiative. Set in context of diversified student body (e.g. Archer 2007). Transition = challenging, especially for non-traditional and FinF students, with respect to learning (develop into autonomous learners/ independent learning skills), confidence and security in themselves, fear of isolation and need for belonging and 'friendsickness'
Aim: To present evaluation of 'Marketing Downloads' (where students work in self-selected pairs to choose an example of marketing practice to present to their colleagues during the class and previous year students come in to discuss experiences and present their downloads); to show how it facilitated 'smoother' transitions.
Theoretical frame: Self-efficacy
Methodology: Qualitative evaluation: focus groups. Students from Marketing Principles class (n=25/ 5 x focus groups)
Findings:
'Marketing Downloads' helped as ice-breaker to learning environment; no 'right answer' and good interaction between peers. Lower levels of guidance helped to illuminate differences between pre- and undergraduate learning: "this growing realisation of the difference between secondary and tertiary education with the deliberate withdrawal of explicit instruction became apparent in several of the groups" (p.6).
Helped with reciprocity and peer support
Helped students develop 'presentation skills' and feel confident to speak publicly and critique others
Helped develop understandings between theory and world
Core argument: Student-centred design = crucial' "the important elements appear to have been the inclusion of student choice and the requirement to stimulate a discussion which ensured that students began to think about possible questions that they could pose, or alternatively to consider what questions they might be asked" (p.10). Makes 4 recommendations:
"(1) Provide a safe classroom environment where students are able to speak freely without fear of getting something wrong.
(2) Develop exercises which require students to engage with the whole class as well as smaller sub-groups. In this way they can increase their social networks and build relationships to support them through their course.
(3) Ensure the approach is student-centred to enable students to take responsibility for their learning and begin the journey to independent learners, in other words to make the transition from secondary to tertiary education....
(4) Link activities to the outside world so that students can see the relevance of their studies" (p.10).

Context: Sought to examine perspectives of mature age (25+) students' experiences of support services and barriers to study. Works from Cullity's (2006) estimate that 38% of commencing UG students = mature age. Cites work that argues mature age students = similar performance to younger students; mature age students more likely to have family responsibilities that impact on learning. Discusses 'cycle of low wage employment' and education as a means out of it. Returning to education = impact on learning identities. Works from rationale that low SES mature age students need support: "Mature students from a LSES background are likely to require additional support services to compensate for probable financial, educational, and social disadvantages" (p.509).
Aim: To examine a) barriers to study, b) use of current university support services, c) helpfulness of support
services if used, and d) responses to a range of proposed support strategies not currently offered by a major Australian institution among mature-aged students (p.509)
Theoretical frame:
Methodology: Mixed methods - interviews and focus groups; audit of university support services + online survey to explore patterns of usage/ barriers to usage. Study conducted in 2006 (presumably at QUT). Uni has 60% new enrolments = mature age students/ 16% = low SES. Attrition rates for mature/younger students = same/ retention/success ratios similar for mature/young low SES students. Low SES students enter via access scheme and go through specialised orientation program. Two-phased study: pilot study (focus groups/interviews with mature age students - findings fed into 'multifaceted strategy' to support mature low SES students (phase 2 = evaluation of these via online survey). Low SES identified by possession of health care card. 31 participants (10 = low SES: Year 1 - PG). Phase 1 = 23 participants (4 x focus groups); 8 x individual interviews. 223 students participated in online survey + statistical analysis
Findings: Analysis suggests patterns in terms of usage according to SES, age and enrolment status
Phase 1: Two main barriers: responsibility conflict and adjustment to university life
Lack of awareness of support services = issue
Suggestions generated = social events for mature age students, computing courses, greater flexibility in delivery
Phase 2:
Low SES made more use of financial services
No statistic difference in perceived helpfulness of services (by SES)
Low SES students less likely to use disability support/ counselling and academic services
Low SES students reported not using services because services not available when needed (same for 45+ years)
Core argument: Students aged 45+ need greater support adjusting to university life and support services are inadequate: "who indicated that several services were not available when they needed or wanted to use them" (p.519). Lack of awareness of where to go for help = significant: "uncertainty of where to go for assistance was reported by 76% of LSES students, and 54% of non LSES students suggests that current support services targeted at adjustment to university life are not adequately promoted, or that students are unaware of how services could help them" (p.523)

Context: Online experiences of students studying in VET pathway course (part of ALTC-funded project exploring first year experiences of university students who articulated via TAFE). Students who transition into university from TAFE experience adaptation challenges because of shifts in epistemology (practice/ active knowledge in TAFE; scholarly knowledge at university; see Wheelahan, 2009). Implications for balancing family/ life/ study because many TAFE articulants tend to be mature age students. Academic literacies = also significant area for adaptation. Assumptions about students' technological experience create further adaptation challenges/ anxiety: "We should not assume that the enhanced flexibility offered by e-learning is automatically more inclusive for diverse groups of students than traditional teaching methods. Unplanned or unsupported use of technology can just as easily result in learning difficulties or even alienation from the learning process" (p.641).
Aim: To offer 'problem solution' approach to designing technology preparation course for students who have transitioned into higher education from TAFE
Methodology: ALTC project explored student experience of first year of university in Nursing, Business and Law, and Early Childhood education. Methods: survey (n=529) + follow up interviews/ focus groups (n=63). Demographic details for survey participants on p.643 (slightly more females; nealy 50% FinF; 30% low SES; nearly 40% NESB; 30% mature age: 26-65 years of age).
Findings: 'Significant number' of students struggled with online component of their studies, which contributed to stress and anxiety experienced.
Education Technology Preparation (ETP) course designed as a response (described on p.646).
Challenges identified in survey:
- Balancing work-life-study (49.9%)
- Understanding academic conventions (48.77%)
- Academic writing (42.15%)
- Academic reading (29%)
- Assessment (29%)
- Using online environment (22%) - qualitative data reports difficulties with online tutorials, doing online assessments, not knowing how to navigate online systems. Some students believed blended/ online learning = inadequate for supporting transition (see p.644)
Students overwhelmingly reported positive reaction to the ETP course designed to support online transitions
Core argument: "For universities planning on integrating elements of online learning more broadly into the curriculum, it is imperative that adequate opportunities are afforded students to develop the necessary skills and capabilities. Institutions will need to factor in the potential costs of these opportunities which must be timely and, for some students, will need to be delivered in face to face, practically orientated sessions" (p.648).

Context: CDU is a dual-sector institution where the majority of students (73%) are female and mature age. This paper examines the efficacy of online (e-learning) innovations in CDU's enabling program, TEP, where the reported attrition rate was 65%; there is a low pass rate; and 75% of students study online. Contextualised in widening participation agenda and use of technology in learning as a means to facilitate 'social presence'.
Aim: To evaluate three online tech/pedagogical innovations: a) Screen-capture videos; synchronous tutorials; and online discussion boards for their capacity to effectively facilitate students' engagement and learning (p. 259).
Methodology: 3 x surveys over 2 x semesters in 2011 administered to students to gather feedback on synchronous tutorials and videos. Also further investigation via 15-minute telephone interviews which also sought feedback on online discussion boards. Response rates for surveys: Survey 1, 91/300 responses; Survey 2, 41/300 responses; Survey 3, 143/640 responses. Eleven student interviews conducted.
Findings: All three innovations have the capacity to facilitate student engagement with synchronous tutorials and videos being regarded as most useful. It is recommended that discussion boards be more directed and active with prompt feedback addressing students' needs. Recommends staff training in effective use of online pedagogies.
Core Argument: Brief discussion of high attrition rates and subsequent intervention may be useful. (p. 258).

Context: NCSEHE-funded research exploring targeted improvements for students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (SwASD). Context = expected growth in number of SwASD in coming years in higher education and "failure of existing supports". SwASD often have poor academic outcomes. The specific needs of SwASD mean that built environment needs to be considered (e.g. sensory-scape). Review of literature suggests that SwASD struggle with social interaction; coping with the learning environment, that is, sensory overload, lack of structure and predictability; and engaging academically. These students = unlikely to seek support
Aim: To explore design of built environment as = holistic framework of support for SwASD in higher education; to recommend holistic disability supports, pedagogical innovations, inclusive design solutions and the potential under the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) for funding to support students with ASD in higher education (p.5). Research questions are:
1. What is the scope of existing support provided to students with ASD in Australian higher education institutions?
2. What are the experiences and individual needs of higher education students with ASD?
3. What opportunities exist to enhance support for students with ASD in higher education?
4. What is the potential for funding under the NDIS to support students with ASD in higher education? (p.10)
Methodology: Mixed methods: Literature review, survey, photography (SwASD). Survey Monkey survey sent to subscribers on ATEND network (n=35) with 2 MCQ: 1) types of supports provided to students with ASD, 2) the types of supports provided to the staff (academic and professional) working with students with ASD. Two open-ended Qs: effective ways of supporting students, examples of good practice. Offers case studies of good practice from universities; student experience (photography) with 6 SwASD from UTAS
Findings:
- Most common form of assistance reported in surveys = LAP (learning access plan), internal reference to counselling service/staff, internal reference to study support services. Also mentioned: reference to external/community services, student support services or information on disability. Less prevalent = peer-mentoring/ specific support for ASD, transition programs for SwASD
- Support for staff = mainly regarding inclusive teaching practices and more likely to be supported via web-based general disability resources (rather than ASD-specific)
- Strong emphasis on individualised assessment and support = most common suggestion regarding good practice
Student data:
Contextual factors to consider = sensory environment (nowhere left to go), social environment (navingating 'hidden curriculum and social norms = difficult; e.g. leaving a class to avoid group work), cognitive environment (difficult to 'make sense' of university worlds = navigation, legibility, learning styles)
Coping mechanisms: "Several participants discussed the use of personal devices including earplugs, stimming toys (props that support repetitive body movements - used as a self-calming mechanism) and other physical aids to reduce sensory overload and anxieties" (p.62); escaping when it's their 'turn' or it's too much, turning up early to wind down and desensitise.
Recommendations
Holistic supports need to extend beyond academic support and include social skills, self-management, advocacy and personal development.
Universal design principles "may provide a useful pedagogical framework to support students with ASD and the
broader population of students" (p.6).
SwASD can experience sensory overload from acoustic and visual stimuli and have difficulty navigating online and offline spaces and experience anxiety over 'forced social interaction' = means a need for more sensory calming spaces and discrete escape/safe spaces
Core argument: Need to develop more holistic supports for SwASD and increase staff awareness of ASD and help them to develop their understandings and practices with these students. More research is needed to explore possibilities of supporting SwASD through/with NDIS

Context: UK higher education context: pre/ post-1992 universities (first year computing modules) in context of increased student diversity. ESRC/ TLRP-funded project
Aim: To examine conditions of (dis)engagement in/from learning; to consider "what might be done to increase and widen academic engagement in the computing classroom" (abstract)
Theoretical frame: Uses different conceptual lenses: habitus (Bourdieu), approaches to learning (Prosser & Trigwell) and theories of knowing (Belenky et al.). Frame engagement around 'deep' learning and disengagement around 'surface' learning
Deliberately resists binary labels of traditional/ non-traditional students.
Methodology: Employed "range of mostly qualitative methods': interviews and focus group meetings, observations of lessons with video-stimulated review, document collection. Wider project focused on subject areas that attract diverse learners (computing, nursing, social work, business, biology). This paper focuses on computing only in 2 different universities.
Findings: There are many periods/ moments in which students are not academically engaged because their diverse needs are not met.
Describes differences in learning spaces and class size, and similarities in content and level.
Main reasons for disengagement:
_ Variation in students' prior knowledge ranged well above and below that assumed by tutors.
_ Students' opportunities to think through problems collaboratively or independently were curtailed.
_ Students' different interests, backgrounds and motivations were not known, ignored and/ or not valued.
_ The dominant culture of the classroom is unwelcoming or alienating to some (female) students (p.199).
Staying quiet: Students generally did not offer answers in either large or small class environments (unwilling to speak out) - curriculum and pedagogies = not addressing diversity in student body (and different kinds of qualifications students use to gain access). Students don't want to expose lack of knowledge/ be humiliated. Tutor B started from assumption that students knew nothing or little, but then failed to extend more knowledgeable/confident students. Students described feeling more confident in peer groups.
Getting stuck: students spoke of enjoying 'playing around' (aka a problem-solving approach) in own time but seemed very dependent on tutors when stuck in class - short analysis of tutor talk shows that in one situation, tutor took over and showed student what to do
No connection: engagement = related to students' reasons for choosing computing course (to get a job but with little connection to life outside the course/ uni).
Gender (for computing): offer example of 'Ana' who is marginalised by male peers and male tutor
Core argument: There are several reasons for disengagement. There is no one-size fits all approach to addressing/ responding to diversity. They "call on academic leaders and developers to play a part in creating a climate of trust and openness in which staff and managers can express and debate their ideas and beliefs respectfully, make pedagogical and curricula improvements unhampered by unwieldy bureaucracy, and challenge policies, practices and discourses that inhibit the creation of inclusive learning environments" (p.200).

Context: This paper explores changing rationalisations of equity in Australian education policy and then draws upon ethnographic research to illustrate different ways equity is understood and enacted by educators. Equity has been reframed as "a 'market enhancing' mechanism and melted into economic productivity agendas" (abstract). Draws on Rose's (1999) notion of the 'neo-social' = "a rejuvenated governmental interest in enabling healthy and positive social environments, but primarily for the sake of fostering greater economic productivity" (p.187)
Aim: To explore how ethical it is to 'tailor' equity in secondary schools - one low SES/ one high SES (based on policies that call schools/parents/individuals to exercise freedom of choice). His research seeks to "draw links between the macro and micro realms of governance: examining the broader ecology of governance (i.e. political imaginaries, rationalities and technologies) and also how these forces are written into or contested by everyday (i.e. at the coalface) forms of governance" (p.188)
Theoretical frame: Critical/political sociology of higher education
Methodology: Draws on ethnographic work in two disparate secondary schools in Melbourne
Findings: Educators tailor their responses to the equity agenda according to the perceived needs and desires of local community. The ways that each school and the educators in the schools differs according to their contexts and communities: the low SES school (Clapton) positioned equity as care and refuge and compensation for the circumstances from which their students come from (poor, inconsistent living arrangements noted) - which lead to ways in which equity was enacted through pedagogy/ teaching practices = governmentality as 'pastoral power' (Foucault, 2007). The low SES school (Bridgeway) shaped/ was shaped by a view of equity driven by parents wanting equality of opportunity and resources (my child hasn't done what that child has done) and not 'classic' approaches to equity (not perceived as salient in this context). Bridgeway demonstrates a highly individualised approach to well-being (neo-social approach) - based around a [middle-class] view of what it takes to be successful: "producing excellence in a competitive environment" (p.196) - equity was "absorbed into a bigger project of maximising advantage" (p.197)
Core argument: Questions whether equity can be tailored, given that equity is a very flexible concept: the differences in the data "reflect a similar diversity in policy, where multiple versions of equity operate" (p.197). Also, given that the schools are so different, they were both "unequally placed to enact versions of equity in policy" (p.197) - each version of equity derived from conditions in each school [responded to]. "...how might every child be expected to have every opportunity if equity is unequally distributed in form and practice?" (p.198)

Context: Teacher education/ teacher professionalization/ professional development in Victoria. Article set against analysis of evolving education policy in Australia (individualisation of responsibility, neoliberal turn, push towards professionalization and regulation). In particular, the authors focus on how the notion of care has shifted in educational policy: "That is, while teaching has long been understood as a caring profession, questions of the who, what and how of 'care' exist within a negotiated space" (p.5). In contemporary policy the relational elements have shifted from people to 'stakeholders'; "That is, there is a depersonalisation and an instrumentalism in the transactional nature of teacher-student relationships today" and "Thus, the 'who' of the relation of care becomes two economic units whose success or failure is contingent upon their value being increased" (p.6).
Aim: To examine the policy case of the Special Needs Plan; VITPol, 2016) using critical policy analysis and Noddings' (1984) ethics of care; "to explore the ways in which teachers might be positioned to make particular
choices about responsibility and care in their adherence to such standards and the types of unseen costs that may hide beneath such noble goals of the professional regulator" (p.3)
Theoretical frame: Post-structuralist understandings of power, knowledge and truth (as plural, contested, open to interpretation). Noddings' work on care and teaching - teaching as a caring relationship as the one caring and the one being cared for. Education, viewed by Noddings' ethics of care, is "an ethical moment is to be negotiated differently in each situation" (p.6), based on situational rather than virtue ethics (aka adherence to rules of behavior).
Methodology: Critical policy analysis
Core argument: Contemporary policy has reconfigured care to focus more on professional development than caring-in-practice: "the policy discourse, self-responsibilisation as an expression of the enterprising self - technologised by accountability and audit measures within the market-based logics of neoliberalism - has shifted the focus of teachers' care away from the student and onto the teachers' own need for professional recognition and advancement" (p.12).

Context: Widening participation in context of teacher training/ pre-service teacher education in Australia and UK. Focus = outreach programs/ mentoring/ aspiration raising and teachers' contributions/ contributions of teacher education
Aim: To examine how teacher education programs contribute/ how they should contribute to preparing teachers to advocate for WP and to reimagine how WP might work; "as agents of a 'pedagogy of difference'" (p.43).
Theoretical frame: Draws on Bourdieu's tools: (classed) capital, habitus. Offers working definition of 'advocacy' on p.45
Methodology: Literature review: role of school teachers in WP/ student ambassador/ mentors (evaluation of). Asks 3 questions to frame review of 60 papers (published literature and grey literature):
1. In what ways can teachers and pre-service teachers be advocates for WP?
2. How does teacher education and training prepare them to be advocates for WP?
3. How could pre-service teacher education be enhanced to enable more teachers and pre-service teachers to be better advocates for WP?
Findings:
Question 1: scopes literature that illustrates narrowing/ deficit conceptions of teachers with relation to NZ indigenous v. European students (Rubie-Davies, Hattie and Hamilton (2006); class-based assumptions in UK (Preston, 2003); unexamined prejudices in Australia (Allard & Santoro, 2006); lack of representation of minority groups in teaching staff in UK (Menter et al., 2006), USA (Bartolome, 2004). Also, note work by Basit & Santoro (2010) = 'ethnic' teachers can be cultural experts. Authors push back against this idea = teacher training should ensure all teachers = advocates for WP: "Advocacy for WP requires more than employing teachers who reflect the communities they serve and extends beyond ethnicity" (p.47).
Question 2: Notes literature that asserts that teacher education tends to treat student diversity in "a superficial and fragmentary way" (p.48): e.g, Mills et al., 2008; Abbott-Chapman, 2011. Include attention to teacher identity (lack of focus on teachers' identity formation), teachers' empathy, valuing diversity - draws on New Literacy Studies (Barton et al., 2007), critical reflection, and advocacy and dealing with conflict (fear of conflict: Athanases and de Oliveira, 2007).
Question 3: Examines literature on student mentors/ambassadors - evidence that student ambassadors = effective approach to WP (Austin and Hatt, 2005; Church and Kerrigan, 2010; Hatt, Baxter and Tate,
2007; HEFCE, 2003; Thompson, 2010). Argues that institutions "have largely failed to take a strategic approach to partnership with schools" (p.51). Students can be role models or a form of 'hot knowledge' [but see Slack et al., 2013 for argument positioning students as 'warm information']
Core argument: Although teacher training education = well place to advance WP agenda, WP and teacher education do not work collaboratively to achieve this end. Authors intend to "review current teacher education programmes to assess the degree to which potential WP advocates are already prepared for the role [of WP advocates]" (p.54)

Context: Care in education is often connected with feminine/ women, and the author questions whether this is the case in the NZ higher education context. Author notes that care in unevenly distributed in society (mostly by women and ethnic minorities - see p.308). Author also discusses Tronto's 4 conceptualisations of care (caring about, taking care of, care-giving, care-receiving), which disrupt traditional dyadic models of care, and Noddings' model includes caring for self, which connects with other views of care as being intersected between self and others (e.g. Gilligan, 1982). Moving beyond traditional models of familial care means that care is a social and political practice, which all genders are capable of engaging in (thus resisting the feminised view of care). Author also points to cultural understandings and practices of care (e.g. care as communal activity in Indigenous cultures), and the holistic analysis of the political nature of care can lead to its conceptualisation as caring-as-activism (see McKamey, 2011; bell hooks) as communal practice.
In higher education, care is often configured as pastoral care, focusing on care-giving and care-receiving. Author notes Walker, Greaves & Grey's (2006) work which points to how structures and discourses impact on academics' caring practice, which is made more difficult by neoliberal drivers: "When universities foster individualism and competition between staff, it can be difficult for a caring community to thrive, especially if care is based on a shared responsibility to ensure that all people can live fulfilling lives" (p.309).
Aim:
Theoretical frame: Care as practice; Noddings' (1984) view of care as 'rooted in receptivity, relatedness, and responsiveness' (p.2, cited on p.308). Definition of care: "Care is enacted within private and public contexts, shaping personal, social, institutional, and political relations" (p.310). Care is gendered: " Caring about, pedagogical (or academic) care, instrumental care, and challenge are seen as masculine and involving the mind, while caring for, pastoral care, relational care, and support are considered feminine and associated with the body and emotions" (p.316).
Methodology: Qualitative/ narrative study of NZ university teachers' (n=22) constructions of care (her PhD research). Author analysed teachers' narratives for models and conceptualisations of care according to the literature - looking at what was said and what was left unsaid.
Findings: Models of care discussed in the narratives of pastoral care (support for students) and pedagogical care (relating to teaching and learning) were coded as:
- Tronto's 4-conceptualisations of care: care about, taking care of, care-giving, care-receiving)
- Pastoral care
- Care-as-activism
- Care for oneself
Dominant mode of care in narratives = care-giving by individual teachers
Teachers spoke of individual forms of care: getting to know students/ build rapport/ bringing in knowledge of students' home countries or contexts. Being a good teacher involves 'active care-giving strategies' which require time and effort (p.311), such as speaking to students 1-to-1, reaching out to students, linking students with pastoral supports (proactive care-giving).
Some teachers spoke of collective caring (e.g. through use of plural first person) - e.g. care-as-facilitator/ shared care model described by 'Susan' on p.312
Pedagogical care discussed by teachers, in terms of giving them content 'that's good for them' (see quote from 'Liz' on p.312), which involves taking risks/ advocating for marginalised and is thus a form of care-as-activism.
Core argument: University teachers enact various forms of care (as demonstrated through analysis of their narratives, although the author acknowledges the limitations of relying on self-reports, self-narrated stories on own practice). Mostly the care is enacted by individuals: "This individualisation of care marginalizes caring practices and does not acknowledge how the interests of students, teachers, and the university are interdependent. For the most part, narratives of care were about particular circumstances rather than ongoing relations that act to maintain the well-being of self, others, and the educational environment" (p.316).
Study participants challenge the binary gendered understandings of care, but generally the author argues that care is not prioritized by universities: "The narratives of study participants (both male and female) suggest that
care is a key part of their professional teaching role in their university and occurs in many forms, but this care is not generally acknowledged or valued" (p.317).
Author argues "there is also a need for synthesis, to integrate ideas about care to provide a new perspective on what care is" because "Practices of care involve much more than care-giving in dyadic contexts and, as this research has shown, include care-as-activism, care-as-advocacy, care-facilitation, communal care, and care for oneself" (p.317).

Context: WP in England - examines intersections of neoliberalism and WP + implications for teaching and learning. HE = in 'state of flux', driven by sustained commitment to offering employability. Neoliberal drivers = pushed institutions towards positioning themselves as 'global universities' and 'world class'. "Neoliberal imperatives have justified moves to marketise higher education, with league tables, branding, discourses of 'excellence' and competition for students framing such moves" (p.30) - 'neoliberal commonsense' (Torres, 2013). As a result, attention to pedagogies for diverse learners has been diminished/ lost. Research also set in context of stratified system, which has impacted on possibilities, policies and practices of WP/equity
Aim: To explore "how 'teaching excellence' is discursively enacted across a differentiated and stratified HE sector" (p.31) - examine diversity of teaching and learning in context of creeping marketization, accountability and league tables
Theoretical frame: Draws on notion of pedagogic stratification = hegemonic and performative; Foucault: power-discourse-knowledge
Methodology: Qualitative: in-depth interviews with 33 senior managers in 11 English universities (HEA-funded research). 11 universities chosen on basis of characteristics/ checked against typology of English universities. Critical discourse analysis of websites and teaching-related documents; survey of 350 teaching-related staff
Findings: Excellence = framed differently by different institutions (networks/ alignments)
Excellent student experience (quality, league tables; hegemonic discourse)
Managing a sense of belonging (partly for gaining positive student experience)
Drive to be distinctive = tension between neoliberal driver to be standard and distinct
Analysis of discourses identifies repeated words and phrases: "'holistic learning', 'creating independent learners', 'providing opportunities for extra-curricular activities', 'employability', 'developing skills', 'student engagement' and 'student-centred teaching'" (p.38) - but managers interviewed struggled to articulate/ explain meanings behind these words: "The discourses circulating 'teaching excellence' operate as a panopticon to regulate senior academics' relation to pedagogical concerns in the institutional space" (p.38).
Particular tensions between research-intensive and teaching-intensive universities and allocation of resources, particularly in terms of positional/ market positioning
Core argument: Discourse of 'teaching excellence' = functions as a 'regime of truth', "
that operates to discipline (institutional and individual) practices and subjectivities, restricting conceptions of teaching, and limiting opportunities for critical pedagogies" (p.29).

Context: Set within the context of a widening participation agenda adopted by the Australian HE which focuses on disadvantaged students, especially low SES students, highlighting an increasing interest in ways to facilitate the success of these students in HEIs.
Aim: To report on the findings from an Australian study (Devlin, Kift, Nelson, Smith & McKay, 2012), which highlighted the 'use of technology in effectively teaching and supporting students from LSES backgrounds' as a key theme. RQ of original study: "What works effectively to teach and support LSES students?" (p. 95)
Theoretical framework: Conceptual framework: 'sociocultural incongruence' (Devlin, 2013) - 'describes the circumstances in which students from LSES backgrounds attempt to engage with the particular sociocultural discourses, tacit expectations and norms of HE' (p. 96); Theoretical concepts: 'constructivism (Bruner, 1996), transition pedagogy (Kift, 2009; Kift & Nelson, 2005), inclusive pedagogy (Waterfield & West, 2006), integrated curriculum design (Hockings, 2010).
Methodology: Qualitative approach - focused on success of students (Devlin et al., 2012); Data collection methods: Literature review on experience of LSES students in HE; semi-structured interviews (face-to-face/telephone) (115); environmental scan of effective policy, programs and practice in Australian HE to teach and/or support students from LSES status backgrounds; Participants: LSES students (n=89) who are considered 'successful' and are the first generation to attend university in their family; Staff (n=26) who are known for their excellent provision of support and/or teaching LSES background students at university; Research setting: 17/39 Australian universities from Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, Tasmania, NSW, South Australia and ACT; Sample: universities from the Australian Technology Network, the Group of Eight, dual sector universities, regional universities, unaligned universities & post-Dawkin universities; Data analysis: Thematic analysis.
Findings: 1)Broad themes: Important components for facilitating student success - flexibility, variability & choice; 2)Specific finding: Important role of technology in enhancing the HE experience for students from low SES backgrounds (52 comments from students & 13 comments from staff were coded under the sub-theme of teaching with technology); 3) Four principles evident in data: i) 'Using a range of resources and media', ii)Facilitating interactive and connected learning, iii)Enabling personalised learning, iv)Assuring high academic standards.
Discussion: Implications - 1) Changing role of educators - increasing role of educators as a facilitator: University educators should 'embrace personalised and collaborative learning alongside didactic methods of teaching' (p. 101); 2) Need for teaching and support staff to continually review their use of technology to "ensure it is inclusive and that it supports a wide range of learning preferences and individual circumstances" (Devlin et al. 2012, p. 10); 3) Institutional policy makers and leaders should 'consider the availability of appropriate technology and connectivity for LSES students" as well as "ensuring policy and other decisions do not exclude LSES students from learning and other opportunities" (Devlin et al., 2012, p. 12).; 4) It is important to rethink the role of educators in universities as well as to reward and recognise mechanisms for teaching & to examine the institutional policies which underpin these. Critical questions to consider:
- 'How should institutions orient and induct new staff into teaching with technology?
- What professional development for ongoing enhancement is appropriate?
- Where and how should support for staff using technology in learning and teaching be provided?
- To what extent should innovation in teaching using technology feature in criteria for awards and
promotion?' (p. 102)
Core argument: Teaching with technology offers LSES students with the flexibility & options needed to access and participate successfully in tertiary education, consequently enhancing their HE experiences and educational outcomes.

Context: Explores the widening participation agenda from perspective of increased diversity in student population requiring attention to language and literacy skills [their word], from the position that non-traditional students are often "incorrectly labelled as 'lacking academic quality'" (abstract). Paper is situated in post-massification context and explores both UK and Australia political/policy evolutions and explores 'non-traditional' entrance into higher education (aka enabling in Australian context)..
Aim: Explores assessment mechanisms for identifying students 'at risk' and considers professional development needed to help academic staff understand and intervene.
Methodology: Discussion
Discussion: Draws on the 'lowering standards' debate: "while diversity and quality are somehow mutually incompatible and one may either sustain quality by limiting diversity, or accommodate diversity at the expense of quality, there are compelling imperatives to do both" (p.31). Unpacks notions of diversity and quality in context of this debate
Unpacks academic literacy - part of 'institutional habitus' (ref to Thomas, 2002): "it can surely serve to exclude certain groups while maintaining the dominance of others who acquire 'legitimacy' by virtue of the degree of fit between what is the product of their family, educational and life experiences and the expectations of higher education institutions" (p.33) and institutions have 'moral obligation to support non-traditional students. Discusses notion of 'language proficiency' as restricted to NESB students - doesn't include NES students, which is problematic for the diversified student body. Presents Murray's 3-part deconstruction of 'proficiency' (communicative competence, academic literacy, professional communication. 'Proficiency' = made up of 4 superordinate categories: grammatical competence, sociolinguistic competence, discourse competence and strategic competence (p.34)
Non-traditional students most likely to require support with 'academic literacy set' for disciplines, requiring "supportive interventions designed to better align language usage with the customs and expectations of the academy" (p.36). Authors draw on argument to embed academic language and literacy support within disciplinary areas.
Discusses PELA - to whom and how should it be operationalized? Equity argument for not picking on particular student groups: "it is no longer possible to make sensible assumptions about the proficiency of any commencing students, and having regard to principles of equity and the need to avoid discrimination by selecting students
on the basis of educational, geographical and socio-economic origins" (p.37). Universal/mandatory assessment = logistical nightmare - could be made voluntary with incentives (see Murray's work at UniSA). How = diagnostic test or assessment via an early piece of assessed coursework. Also consider post-PELA support. Draws on Clerehen and Northedge re: moving away from remedial views of language/ literacies and embedding support within disciplines with professional development for staff.
Core argument: Widening participation is "about changing attitudes and pedagogical practices and approaches that are often deeply entrenched in higher education institutions, where a deficit view of these cohorts predominates and the students who comprise them are stigmatized as a result" (p.39). Issues with language = 'symptomatic' of broader issues relating to views of acculturation, particularly for students who arrive with "a significantly greater shortfall in the kind of cultural capital successful study in this environment demands" (p.40)