The Australian Universities Accord paper recognises universities as anchor institutions that ‘are embedded in, and contribute directly to the development of, their diverse and multi-layered communities.’ As public purpose institutions, it is fundamental that the new Accord enables universities to tackle inequity as part of a holistic, national strategy – so that we can better serve the whole community.
The Dawkins reforms in the late 1980s ushered in a new era for higher education, transforming access to university from an elite to a mass model, underpinned by a philosophical commitment to greater equity in higher education.
As a result, equity policies and practices in Australia have 30+ years of maturity – enough time to now ask and answer some tough questions.
The Bradley Review in 2008 set a number of targets for Australian higher education. The first was a national target of at least 40% of 25–34-year-olds attaining a qualification of bachelor level or above by 2020. This target has been met. The second was a target stipulating that 20% of higher education enrolments at undergraduate level are people from low SES backgrounds. This target has not been met. The participation rate of low SES students in higher education still sits at around 17% nationally.
In addition to this, the higher education sector is showing signs of socio-economic segregation. Fifteen universities (out of 42) educate almost 60 per cent of the total low SES student population. Eleven universities educate almost 60 per cent of Australia’s rural and regional students.
Our current funding model does not appropriately support the universities who make this enormous contribution to low SES participation in Australian higher education.
HEPPP equity support funding is still a very small proportion of the overall teaching grant for any university. For universities with high concentrations of equity cohorts, additional transition and academic support is needed to ensure student success.
The top equity universities also tend to be those with less international student income, and lower research block grant funding. Those with the highest level of research block grant funding have the lowest equity numbers.
There is a view that the best teaching and learning happens in universities with strong research profiles, where research informs teaching and vice versa. If that is the case, how are the majority of equity students getting the benefit of this unique university offering?
Conversely what are the incentives for universities with low numbers of equity cohorts to contribute to system growth, rather than just taking the best and brightest of a group of students already heading to university?
A rehaul of the system should reward collaboration between universities, so that we all work together to expand access for equity cohorts across the education ecosystem.
Introduced in 2010, the original HEPPP design emphasised a strong need for partnerships between universities and schools, vocational education and training providers and community groups. We’ve learned that these collaborations work best when institution-agnostic, and designed with students’ needs in mind.
We need a National Education Equity Strategy across the lifetime of learning, from pre-school to primary and secondary schooling and beyond. Built on a foundation of universal access to tertiary education and delivered through flexible secondary schooling pathways and an integrated and learner focused tertiary system, post-school education should deliver a range of credentials, with VET and higher education as equal and respected partners.
Student equity through the Universities Accord
Mon 27 March, 12pm–4pm
This forum is an opportunity for equity practitioners to come together to reflect on the questions posed in the Universities Accord discussion paper, and develop a consolidated response to ensure we achieve meaningful progress in student equity. Register now.