Search

The proportion of students enrolled at university from the lowest quartile of socio-economic position has remained static at around 15% for at least the past 15 years (DEEWR, Transforming Australia's higher education system, ). This paper argues that the apparent lack of progress towards equity of access has been exacerbated due to how socio-economic position (SEP) is measured within higher education. Three major methodological issues are identified: (a) the use of socio-economic indicator for areas (SEIFA) at an inappropriate unit of geographic area (postcode), (b) an inappropriate choice of index (education and occupation), and (c) using the index of education and occupation as the sole indicator of SEP thereby increasing the risk of misclassification of individuals through the operation of ecological fallacy. This paper argues that to address these methodological deficiencies, alternative methods of determining SEP are required at both the aggregate and individual level. Possible options are proposed for use as replacements for the geographic area (postcode) and index (education and occupation) as well as additional measures at the individual or household level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The field of Australian higher education has changed, is changing and is about to change, repositioned in relation to other 'fields of power'. It is a sector now well defined by its institutional groupings and by their relative claims to selectivity and exclusivity, with every suggestion of their differentiation growing. The potential of a 'joined-up' tertiary education system, of vocational education and training (VET) and universities, has the potential to further rework these relations within Australian higher education, as will lifting the volume caps on university student enrolments. Moreover, Australian universities now compete within an international higher education marketplace, ranked by THES and Shanghai Jiao Tiong league tables. 'Catchment areas' and knowledge production have become global. In sum, Australian universities (and agents within them) are positioned differently in the field. And being so variously and variably placed, institutions and agents have different stances available to them, including the positions they can take on student equity. In this paper I begin from the premise that our current stance on equity has been out-positioned, as much by a changing higher education field as by entrenched representations of social groups across regions, institutions, disciplines and degrees. In taking a new stance on equity, the paper is also concerned with the positioning in the field of a new national research centre with a focus on student equity in higher education. In particular, the paper asks what stance this new centre can take on student equity that will resonate on a national and even international scale. And, given a global field of higher education, what definitions of equity and propositions for policy and practice can it offer? What will work in the pursuit of equity? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]