Chapter 6: ensuring access and equity
6.1 Low SeS participation
Students from low SES backgrounds16 are under-represented in Australian higher education.
On average, a student from a high SES background is about three times more likely to attend university than a student from a low SES background. Students from low SES backgrounds are under-represented in professional fields of study such as architecture, law and the creative arts, and are particularly under-represented in medicine, dentistry and economics. At the postgraduate level, less than 10 per cent of students are from a low SES background.
In 2010, the proportion of undergraduate students from the lowest SES quartile who participated in higher education was 16.5 per cent (using the postcode measure of low SES). The proportion of undergraduate students from a low SES background has not changed significantly over the last decade, remaining at around 16 per cent of the total over this period. Since 2001, the number of undergraduate low SES students has risen by 18 per cent from 86,715 to 102,027 in 2010. This is in comparison to an increase of 20 per cent over the same period for all domestic undergraduate students, an increase from 517,626 to 619,625 (Figure 6.1).
16 Previously, the SES of higher education students has been determined by the geographic area or postcode of the student’s home address, using the ABS Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) Index of Education and Occupation. An improved measure of SES is being developed by DEEWR to support the Government’s equity in higher education agenda. While this measure is being developed, an interim measure is being used by DEEWR based on a combination of SEIFA information for Census Districts (a more precise geographic basis than postcode), combined with information on Centrelink payments to university students. Unless otherwise stated, data on higher education students in this report is based on the postcode of the student’s home address, since this is the basis on which participation targets have been set.
Figure 6.1: Total domestic undergraduate students enrolled in all higher education providers and
students from the lowest SES quartile of postcodes, 2001–2010
0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 700,000 Studen ts 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Total students Low SES
Source: DEEWR (various years), selected Higher Education Statistics Collection; Students 2010 full year, Appendix 2: Equity Groups.
There is significant variation in the rate at which individual universities enrol students from the lowest SES quartile of the population. Regional universities enrol higher proportions of undergraduate low SES students while metropolitan patterns of participation vary considerably between institutions. The participation rate of low SES students in Australian institutions ranges from 4 to 37 per cent (Figure 6.2). Currently, 13 universities have achieved proportions of undergraduate low SES students at or above the 20 per cent target. However, in a number of universities, participation remains below 10 per cent.
The reasons for low levels of participation in higher education among low SES students are complex. DEEWR administrative data illustrates the extent to which low SES students are under-represented at key transition points on the educational pathway from school to higher education. For example, in 2009, the apparent Year 12 retention rate (the rate at which Year 7 students complete Year 12) of low SES students was 67 per cent compared with 78 per cent for all students. Of those
students who completed Year 12, 62 per cent of low SES students achieved an Australian Tertiary Admissions Rank (ATAR) compared with 75 per cent of all students. Of the students who achieved an ATAR, 53 per cent of low SES students entered higher education compared with 77 per cent for all students.
Taken together, the findings of relevant studies suggest that the factors that contribute to the below-average participation of students from low SES backgrounds in higher education fall under three main headings: aspiration, achievement, and retention.
Figure 6.2: Domestic students from lowest SES quartile of population (at collection district level), as
a proportion of total undergraduate domestic enrolments, by institution, 2010
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Pe rc em ta ge of lo w SE S students CQ U US Q So ut he rn Cros s Ta smania JC U UN E CS U Ne wc as tle Vi ct or ia So ut h Au st ra lia Ba llar at UW S Fl inde rs US C CD U La Tr ob e Murdoc h Wo llongong EC U RM IT A delaide Griffi th AC U Deak in Cur tin Sw inbur ne QU T Monash Quee nsla nd UT S No tr e Da me UNSW Ma cq ua ri e Bo nd Ca nbe rr a Melbou rn e Sy dn ey UW A AN U Av er ag e
Source: DEEWR (various years), selected Higher Education Statistics Collection; Students 2010 full year, Appendix 2: Equity Groups.
International studies have shown that in countries such as the United Kingdom, New Zealand, the United States and Canada, students from low SES backgrounds are under-represented in higher education. While definitions of low SES or economic disadvantage vary (making comparisons difficult), the evidence suggests that no country has been able to achieve significant improvements in participation rates in comparison to higher SES groups (Centre for the Study of Higher Education 2008, p. 71). For example, Canada has higher tertiary participation rates than Australia but ‘high income students’ are almost twice as likely to participate in university as young people from the lowest income quartile (DEEWR 2010, p. 53). In the United Kingdom young people from ‘higher social groupings’ are five to six times more likely to attend university than those from the most disadvantaged backgrounds (DEEWR 2010, p. 59).
6.1.1 aspirations to attend university
Research suggests that SES background has an impact on students’ aspirations to attend university. In the majority of OECD countries, including Australia, 15-year-olds from the lowest SES quartile are about half as likely to aspire to tertiary study compared with their peers from the highest SES quartile (OECD 2008, p. 25). A similar result was found in a survey of Australian Year 12 students in 2008. Based on the ABS Index of Education and Occupation (IEO), 66 per of students from high SES-IEO areas expressed a preference to attend university in comparison with 47 per cent of students from low SES-IEO areas (DEEWR 2009, p. v). The evidence is now fairly strong that decisions affecting the participation of low SES students in higher education are made many years earlier, during the first few years of secondary school.
A major study by Cardak and Ryan showed that among young people with similar levels of academic ability at 14 years of age, students from a low SES background were less likely to aspire to higher
education or to achieve a Year 12 qualification. In other words, young people from a low SES background are less likely to turn their early academic capability into successful Year 12 completion and subsequent participation in higher education (Cardak and Ryan 2009). Raising the aspirations of lower secondary school students from low SES backgrounds is a complex issue that must be tackled jointly by schools and higher education providers.
There are several examples in Australia of programs that aim to lift aspirations and entry to higher education, including school–university partnerships, mentoring schemes and residential programs. Non-profit organisations also operate programs, such as the Smith Family’s ‘Learning for Life’ program, which involves the sponsorship of students from disadvantaged families (DEEWR 2010). Commonwealth, state and territory governments also provide a range of programs aimed at lifting aspirations and providing career advice. Some states also fund systemic early secondary initiatives as well as ‘first in family’ and transition programs linked with Year 12 completion.
Policies that aim to raise low SES students’ aspirations need to acknowledge the complex factors that influence student aspirations across the SES spectrum. For example, for a young person from a low SES background, the short-term rewards of securing paid employment may outweigh any potential long-term rewards from remaining at school and pursuing higher education. A young person from a low SES background might also perceive the potential risks of engaging in full-time study—in terms of foregone income and the prospects of academic failure—differently from students from higher SES backgrounds (Savage 2011, p. 53).
The survey of Year 12 students mentioned earlier found that a range of expectations and attitudes were associated with the aspiration to attend university. For example, nearly three fifths (59 per cent) of respondents from high SES backgrounds thought that ‘it seems to be the natural thing to go onto university after school’ in comparison with one third (33 per cent) of respondents from low SES backgrounds (DEEWR 2009, p. 76).
As in Australia, other countries have recognised the importance of lifting the achievement rate of low SES school students as a way of improving participation in higher education. For example, in Canada policies are moving away from an explicit focus on financial assistance like scholarships and bursaries to early intervention schemes which address barriers and raise the aspirations of school students (DEEWR 2010, p. 97). Similarly, England’s ‘Aimhigher’ program involved partnerships between universities and schools to offer visits, mentoring, summer schools and master classes (James 2008, p. 76).
6.1.2 school retention and achievement
It is well accepted that low SES students are less likely to complete secondary school (Year 12) and achieve an ATAR than young people from higher SES backgrounds. Furthermore, low SES students generally have lower ATAR scores and these were associated with lower levels of school achievement in Years 9 and 10 (Cardak and Ryan 2009).
Students with lower tertiary entrance scores were more typically students from low SES backgrounds, but with a given tertiary entrance score were equally likely to attend university, irrespective of their SES status (Cardak and Ryan 2009).
While improving the Year 12 (ATAR) attainment level of low SES students will undoubtedly improve participation levels, all ‘ability-based’ selection mechanisms have the potential to favour higher SES students as they tend to have educational, cultural and financial advantages. In recognition of the limitations of the ATAR process, universities have adopted more flexible selection processes, such as
aptitude testing, individual interviews, recognition of prior learning, preparatory courses, auditions and portfolio assessments (James et al 2009). Universities may also take educational disadvantage into account and give more weight to scores from disadvantaged schools (Group of Eight 2011, p. v). It is clear that further effort should be made by the secondary schooling system in partnership with the higher education sector. While there are specific COAG targets for school retention, these should be enhanced by explicit attention to aspiration as well as retention.
6.1.3 Retention beyond the first year of higher education
Evidence suggests that SES background has only a minor impact on higher education student retention rates. Analysis using Commonwealth Higher Education Student Support Numbers (CHESSNs) has been discussed in Chapter 4. They can also be used to more accurately track low SES (and all other) student attrition, re-enrolment in other institutions, and completions than was previously possible. This data indicates that while a higher proportion of undergraduate students from a low SES background drop out during or after their first year compared with students from a high SES background, the completion rate of low SES students is only slightly below the total rate for all students (Figure 6.3). The Bradley Review observed that once enrolled in higher education, low SES students achieve 97 per cent of the pass rates of medium and high SES students (DEEWR 2008, p. 30). Similarly, analysis using data from the Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth found that SES background does not affect retention, and instead, the strongest predictor of retention rates is a student’s ATAR (Marks 2007).
Figure 6.3: 2010 status of the 2005 cohort of undergraduate students by SES status
0 20 40 60 80 100 Pe rc en ta ge of coho rt
Completed Still enrolled Dropped out 2006–2009 Dropped out 2005 and never re-enrolled
Low SES Medium SES High SES Total
Source: DEEWR administrative data based on Commonwealth Higher Education Student Support Numbers.
While analyses of participation data over the past decade suggest that the retention and completion rates of low SES students in higher education are almost comparable to the rate for all students, the Panel cannot be confident that this would be sustained if the overall participation rate of low SES students in higher education increased. As only 16 per cent of undergraduate enrolments are from
the lowest SES quartile, the students in this group may have characteristics that are not typical of all students from low SES backgrounds.
Two Australian studies have found that first-year university students from low SES backgrounds tend to outperform their peers from higher SES backgrounds with the same tertiary entrance score during the first year of university (Dobson and Skuja 2005; Birch and Miller 2006). Given the barriers low SES students have to overcome to reach university, the performance of these students might indicate that they are not representative of all potential students from the lowest quartile of the population. The Panel cannot assume that all low SES students will have similar levels of performance or
retention in higher education. Universities may face new challenges in meeting the educational needs of low SES students if they are successful in attracting a higher proportion of low SES students in the future.
Evidence from submissions to the Panel revealed concern among universities that the Government’s participation agenda will result in an increase in the number of students who are less well prepared for higher education, including low SES students. It will be important to monitor the CHESSN data and continue to evaluate the intervention strategies at the institutional and systemic level.