Search

Taking a gap year--a break between high school and university--is becoming increasingly popular with Australian students. In terms of length and purpose, the traditional notion of a gap year being a year off between school and university has expanded considerably over time. For the purposes of the analysis reported in this paper, a person who takes a gap year is defined as "an individual who commenced university one to two years after completing Year 12. This includes those who accept and defer their university placement for one to two years" (Curtis, Mlotkowski & Lumsden 2012). Highlights of this report include: (1) In Australia the incidence of taking a gap year has increased from 10% in the period 1999-2000 to 24% in 2009-10; (2) The top four primary activities undertaken by gap students in 2009-10 were work (51%), full-time study leading to a non-university qualification (10%), other study (6%), and travel (6%); (3) Characteristics of gap-takers include: (a) being academically less inclined than non-gap-takers; (b) living in regional locations when at school; (c) having English speaking backgrounds; (d) being employed when in Year 12 at school; and (e) being less likely to receive Youth Allowance payments while at school; (4) In their first year of university, gap-takers are more likely to study in the areas of education and creative arts; and (5) Those who don't take a gap year are substantially more likely at age 24 to be employed full-time and to work in professional occupations than gap-takers. Much of this difference can be attributed to the fact that, in terms of their careers, gap-takers are a year or two behind those who don't take a gap year. The data do not allow the authors to measure the longer-term outcomes of both groups because the Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth (LSAY) stops at age 25. Appended are: (1) Gap year definitions; and (2) LSAY cohorts sample sizes and durations. (Contains 13 tables.) [For "Bridging the Gap: Who Takes a Gap Year and Why? Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth. Research Report," see ED533077.]

This report reviews the use of loans for learning in 33 European countries and analyses the schemes in eight selected Member States: France, Hungary, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Finland, Sweden and the UK. The analysis shows that loan schemes vary considerably across Europe in terms of types and levels of learning covered, conditions of access, repayment and governance. Some loans aim to increase participation in learning in general, while others are designed to promote equity. The report attempts to assess the selected loans and discusses their strengths and weaknesses and determinants of performance, while considering if a given scheme operates on a large scale or targets niche groups. The evaluation results provide a basis for identifying good practice principles for designing and implementing loans. Policy recommendations are formulated based on these findings. Annexed are: (1) Methodology; (2) Key terms and definitions; (3) Information on countries/schemes selected for in-depth analysis; (4) Proposed typologies of VET loan schemes; (5) Tables and figures; (6) Tosmana truth tables; (7) Questionnaires; (8) Basic characteristics of non-European loan schemes. (Contains 37 tables, 5 figures, 20 boxes and 33 footnotes.)

The "Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-Border Higher Education" were developed and adopted to support and encourage international cooperation and enhance the understanding of the importance of quality provision in cross-border higher education. The purposes of the "Guidelines" are to protect students and other stakeholders from low-quality provision and disreputable providers (that is, degree and accreditation mills) as well as to encourage the development of quality cross-border higher education that meets human, social, economic and cultural needs. The "Guidelines" are not legally binding and member countries are expected to implement them as appropriate in their national context. Based on a survey about the main recommendations of the "Guidelines", this report monitors the extent to which Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries and a few non-member countries comply with its recommendations. The Survey was sent out in June 2010 to all OECD countries. The main conclusion of the survey is that (responding) countries report a high level of compliance with the Guidelines recommendations. On average, responding OECD countries conform to 72% of the main recommendations made to governments, tertiary education institutions, and quality assurance and accreditation agencies. The level of compliance decreases to 67% when recommendations to student bodies are included, but the level of missing information, and thus uncertainty about actual compliance, increases significantly. Appended are: (1) Country Overview of Compliance Levels with the Guidelines for Different Stakeholders; (2) Country Overview of Compliance Levels with Six Key Objectives of the Guidelines; (3) Methodology; (4) Country Answers to the Survey; (5) Overview of National Contact Points; and (6) Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-Border Higher Education. (Contains 2 tables, 12 figures and 1 footnote.)

Sabbatical leaves are viewed as being essential to the ongoing nature of a self-renewing community of scholars. This study was undertaken to provide data on current use of sabbatical leave plans in universities in several countries - Canada; the United States; England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales; Australia, and New Zealand - to provide useful information for possible revision of leave plans. Sixty-six universities were surveyed by means of a questionnaire and the results revealed similarities among the four groups of countries regarding the length of service prior to leave (generally 6 years); differences among the four groups, including the use of retraining leaves as a form of sabbatical; salary paid during regular sabbatical leave; and travel expenses. The conclusions drawn from the data are that Canadian leave plans are not nearly as uniform as those in United States universities; Canadian plans have become more formalized and better documented since 1969; salary paid for full-year leaves in Canadian universities has improved since 1969 and is now substantially better than in the United States, but not as good as in Australia and New Zealand; and participation rates in all countries appear to be higher than those reported prior to 1965 by Ingraham. (JMF)

The challenge of funding a high quality higher education system, ensuring it has the capacity to help meet the increasing demand for high level skills in our economy and the aspirations of our students, has been an ongoing concern for successive Australian governments over many years. This paper reviews the findings and recommendations of significant reviews of Australia's higher education funding system from the 1988 Dawkins white paper through to the 2014 "Review of the Demand Driven Funding System." It summarises the challenges identified and responses proposed across that period as well as some recent international literature about higher education reform. What is clear from the survey of major reviews from 1988 to the present is the similarity of issues that were of concern to governments of the day. Successive governments have sought to build and fund a higher education system to meet the need for high level skills and innovative research for the Australian economy. The challenge for all governments has been how to enable greater numbers of students to access the benefits higher education offers--in terms of employment, earnings, social and cultural opportunities--while ensuring the system remains fair, high quality and affordable for both individuals and taxpayers. The number of domestic higher education students has more than doubled since 1989, reaching just over a million in 2014. International students comprised another 350,000 students in 2014. As student numbers have grown, they have come from more diverse social, economic and academic backgrounds. The number of providers and their diversity has also grown, with around 20 new public universities since the late 1980s and the emergence of significant numbers of non-university providers. The proportion of the Australian working age population with a bachelor degree or higher qualification has tripled since 1989 to just over 25 per cent. Direct Australian Government funding for teaching, learning and research has grown both in absolute and real terms, rising from $3.2 billion in 1989 to $15.4 billion in 2014, more than doubling when adjusted for inflation. Australia is not unique in facing this growth and higher education systems around the world are increasingly moving from elite to mass systems, and beyond to universal systems.

This paper looks at the state of education in knowledge management (KM). It reports findings from a study of knowledge management courses included in the curriculum of academic disciplines of business, computing, and information that was conducted at the Nanyang Technological University (Singapore). Based on a review of course descriptions selected from Web sites of universities in Australia, Canada, Singapore, the United Kingdom, and the United States, the paper describes levels of courses, curriculum areas and topics, and differences in emphasis in teaching KM courses in different departments and schools. A table presents data on the details of KM courses for each university, including the school/department, course title, level, and academic program. A second table lists topics in KM courses for several curriculum areas, including foundations, technology, process (codification), applications, and strategies. (MES)

Taking a break between completing high school and entering university is common overseas, and is becoming more popular in Australia. There are many reasons why young people take a gap year. It may be to travel, to take a break, to study, or to work. The authors' definition of a "gapper" is a young person who commenced university one to two years after completing Year 12. While the concept of a gap year is related to the deferral of a university offer, it is different. Some gappers have deferred, others decide to enrol during their gap year, not beforehand. Similarly, some who defer a university offer subsequently do not take up a place and are thus not defined as gappers. This report was prepared for the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations in 2009 prior to the Australian Government's announcement of proposed changes to Youth Allowance as an initiative in the 2009-10 Budget and the subsequent reforms based on recommendations from the "Review of Student Income Support Reforms" (Dow 2011). The research uses data from three cohorts of the Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth (LSAY) to throw light on the incidence of gap-taking, the characteristics of those taking a gap year, the activities undertaken in the gap years, and subsequent study and employment outcomes. The report also looks at whether there is any evidence that young people were taking a gap year in order to qualify for Youth Allowance payments. This report reveals that: (1) The incidence of gap-taking has increased and it is estimated that around 20% of Australian students who complete high school will take a gap year; (2) Gap-takers tend to be weaker academically, with lower-than-average tertiary entrance rank (TER) scores, lower than average Year 9 mathematics achievement, and less favourable attitudes to school. In addition to academic factors, young people from English speaking backgrounds and from regional locations are more likely to take a gap year. Students who do not receive Youth Allowance payments while at school (and thus who were from higher socioeconomic status families) are also more likely to take a gap year; (3) The most common activities of Australian gap students are work (40%) and study or training (33%), with only 3% reporting travel as their main activity; (4) It appears that relatively few took a gap year principally to qualify for Youth Allowance: four out of 69 who deferred a university place gave "needing to qualify for Youth Allowance" as a reason for their deferral; and (5) The university completion rates of "gappers" are a little lower than "non-gappers". Appended are: (1) Variables and methods; and (2) Supplementary tables. (Contains 25 tables and 15 footnotes.) [For "Who Takes a Gap Year and Why? Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth. Briefing Paper 28," see ED533076.]

This document reviews how performance indicators are currently being used in several Commonwealth countries the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada, and identifies some of the issues associated with performance indicator development and application. It also examines whether there are any agreed upon "key", or common, indicators that can be applied universally. After briefly discussing the background of the study and defining the terminology of, the audiences for, and applications of performance indicators, the paper reviews sources of higher education data published by government, government agencies, or national university organizations, and discusses developments in the application of performance indicators. Case studies from the U.K., Australia, and Canada are used to examine five types of indicators: student indicators, such as population, progression/completion rates, destination and satiation; staff indicators; resource and financial indicators; research indicators; and estate management/physical resources indicators. The characteristics of "good" indicators and various concerns surrounding the use of indicators are also addressed. Findings suggest that performance indicators need to be related to institution objectives, should be used with other measures, and cannot presently be used to compare institutions in different countries. Appendices include lists of sources, publications, and contacts; a comprehensive list of possible indicators, and core indicators recommended by the Council of Ontario Universities. (BF)