The fragile vision that is in Jason Clare’s Accord for the tertiary sector hinges on enabling higher participation rates for underrepresented cohorts.
Two papers out this week provide incredibly valuable insights – and add to speculation that more work might need to be done before the nation starts to give Indigenous students and students with disabilities an even chance.
To get to the stated requirement of 4 in 5 Australians having a tertiary qualification to get a job in 2050, the Accord promises an additional million domestic enrolments, enabled by a far higher participation of Indigenous students, people with disabilities, from low socio-economic communities and/or from rural areas.
There have been rumblings that the Needs Based Funding program for these cohorts, due to start in 12 weeks time, may be postponed for 12 months while policies are further developed (and, ahem, a sizeable chunk of additional change prized from Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ wallet).
The two papers this week start to shed some light on the demand-side issues that appear to have been neglected so far – achieving change by first understanding what really matters to the communities that the Accord policies are trying to assist. Assuming that masses will walk onto campus as soon as the ivory tower drawbridge is lowered fails to understand the holistic factors that constrain tertiary participation.
Research by Edith Cowan researchers Mary-anne Macdonald, Eyal Gringart, Terry Kessaris and Renae Isaacs-Guthridge has been published, sharing the results of a survey of 536 Indigenous and non-Indigenous secondary school students.
The research found that Indigenous and non-Indigenous students were equally likely to have a positive perception of the benefit of education and finishing year 12, but that Indigenous students were significantly less likely to go on to tertiary education.
The researchers concluded that Indigenous students faced historic and systemic disadvantage and policies needed to change to level the playing field, promoting post-secondary education aspirations, employment opportunities relevant to graduates in their home communities, access to homework support and access to a computer.
For the time poor, it’s worth at least catching the quick explainer video from ECU DVC Braden Hill on LinkedIn, which is a great example of rapid, authentic, low cost research translation.
The second paper comes from Jill Duncan and Katie Butler (from Newcastle) and Renee Punch from Southern Cross, looking at the experiences of students with disability who withdraw.
At a time when universities are more intensively focused on addressing attrition, as a result of the competitive domestic and constrained international student market, this paper starts to look at why there are significantly lower retention and completion rates for undergraduate students with a disability.
Looking at a sample of 11 students who chose to withdraw, the researchers conducted stakeholder interviews and found that deficiencies in support systems and inclusion were most often the cause.
“Most of the participants in the current study were eager to return to university, but many advised that this was unlikely while the institutional environment remained unchanged and continued to be incompatible with their needs to manage their health and disability,” the authors said.
Issues included mandatory attendance requirements which posed a challenge for people with chronic health conditions, rigid rules, challenges in accessing relevant support for people who had chronic but not visible disabilities, and simple things like an inability to stand for long periods in a lab but not being allowed to use a stool. The report found that staff and students were often kind, but systemic issues and rules had made them choose between continuing studying and their health.
Identifying the need for a wider study in this little-researched area, the researchers indicated there could be significant potential to reduce attrition of students with disabilities by introducing more flexible policies and practices that would allow all students to attend and participate, as well as support plans that were tailored to individuals.