Student equity’s starring role in Australian higher education: not yet centre field

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?     

Non‐traditional students in Australian higher education: Persistent inequities and the new ideology of ‘student choice’

Abstract

Despite the expansion of access to Australian higher education in the past decade, the participation shares of rural and isolated people and people from lower socio‐economic backgrounds have altered little and remain unacceptably low. This paper reports findings from two national studies at the Centre for the Study of Higher Education that have examined student choices about higher education, especially the inhibiting factors still present for non‐traditional students. The discussion focuses on the dilemmas and challenges for Australian universities in balancing the adoption of entrepreneurial approaches to student recruitment with an unfinished equity agenda. The paper raises questions about the new ideology of individual choice influencing university policy and whether or not this can be reconciled with social equity objectives.     

大众化背景下的高等教育公平政策之分析

我国大众化发展中的高等教育公平政策是指那些对弱势群体起到保护和补偿的政策、法律和规章或者相关的条款。从实践来看,高等教育的主要弱势群体是少数民族、女性、贫困大学生和农民。虽然高等教育公平在大众化中不断得到改善,但是高等教育不公平还继续存在。所以,我国大众化高等教育公平政策的发展只能在两难处境中尽力而为,逐步加以完善。     

Academic standards and regulatory frameworks: necessary compromises?

Assessment regulations in higher education, which are important for assuring threshold academic standards, reflect institutional cultures and histories, and are shaped by pragmatic concerns about quality indicators such as retention and progression rates, as well as principles of equity. This paper articulates some of the tensions that confront higher education institutions in the development and revision of regulatory frameworks, and describes a survey of assessment regulations from a sample of UK higher education institutions for the first year of undergraduate study. The survey identifies key variations in regulatory policy and practice that challenge assumptions about comparability of academic standards between higher education institutions. These findings imply that student success and progression may not be a simple reflection of academic attainment, and raise questions about notions of equity. It is intended that this research will contribute to informed discussion in the sector about academic standards and the regulatory frameworks underpinning first-year assessment policy and practice, and thus potentially lead to more transparent and consistent practice.     

论学分制与高等教育公平

追求教育公平是现代高等教育改革的目标,如何实现高等教育公平?从教学管理的角度出发,以尊重学生个性发展的学分制则是一种实现高等教育公平的制度安排。推行学分制,保证教育公平,符合“以人为本”的教育发展观。     

高等教育公平的历史轨迹——云南大学近五十年不同社会阶层子女接受高等教育机会探析

由于高等教育公平是一个动态过程,必须用历史的、全面的、发展的视角来审视它。本研究抽查了1951-2000年间5355份云南大学"学籍登记卡"的家庭出身,结合历史宏观背景,对云南大学近五十年不同社会阶层子女接受高等教育机会进行了研究。结果表明,中国高等教育并非"完全公平",在不同的历史发展时期和阶段,获得高等教育机会的群体各异,由此教育公平也呈现了不同的表现形式。     

中国基础教育生均经费支出的公平性研究——基于Gini系数和Theil指数的测算

基础教育生均经费支出的公平性影响着教育过程公平和教育结果公平。文章基于1995—2018年基础教育生均经费支出数据和在校生数据,通过计算Gini系数和Theil指数测算了中国基础教育生均经费支出公平性的变化规律。研究发现,1995—2018年中国基础教育生均经费支出公平性总体上处于"比较公平"和"相对合理"水平,且整体上更加公平了;基础教育生均经费支出的省际差异大于区域差异;东部地区基础教育生均经费支出省际差异较大,公平程度较低;全国高中生均经费支出的公平性有降低的趋势。基于以上研究发现,文章提出了相关政策建议。     

Do educational pathways contribute to equity in tertiary education in Australia?

A key assumption of equity policies in Australia, as in many countries, is that pathways from lower-status, vocationally oriented ‘second’ tiers of tertiary education to ‘first’ tier higher education are able to act as an equity mechanism. This is because students from low socio-economic backgrounds are over-represented in former and underrepresented in the latter. The assumption that pathways support equity is tested in this paper through an analysis of the socio-economic profile and institutional destination of student transfers from vocational education and training to higher education in Australia. It finds that educational pathways deepen participation in education by existing social groups but do not effectively widen participation for groups that do not have equitable access. This is as a consequence of the hierarchical structuring of qualifications within VET as well as in higher education.     

“It’s Pretty Essential”: A Critical Race Counter-Narrative of Faculty of Color Understandings of Diversity and Equity in Doctoral Admissions

Using a short story fiction counter-narrative, this critical race study examines how faculty of color within higher education and student affairs doctoral-granting programs bring critical epistemologies to their decision-making in the student admissions process and work to decolonize the academy despite neoliberal pressures. Faculty of color depart from current accounts of faculty decision-making in doctoral education in two key ways—by disregarding standardized measures of success and by considering diversity throughout the entire admissions process—leading us to important insights about how faculty of color differ from white faculty in their perception of and in their emphasis on diversity, equity, and justice in the admissions process. The implications are both broad and specific for creating dynamically diverse campus climates in an era of persistent challenges to affirmative action. The findings speak to the ways that those concerned with educational diversity and equity can support diversity and equity efforts in a neoliberal, color-blind environment. In a world defined by such policy and practice and a country that determines options and opportunity based on race, this study centers the voices of faculty of color in their institutions and analyzes how identity and institutional logics influence behavior.

     

我国高等教育发展规模的现状和潜力分析

无论从高等教育毛入学率 ,还是从成年人口的预期平均受教育程度来看 ,我国高等教育发展规模的实际值与模拟值相比较 ,均存在着一定的差距。根据 1 993至 1 998年的高校招生数据 ,分析当前我国高等教育的潜在规模 ,发现普通高等教育的实际规模水平与潜在规模之间存在较大的差距     

From Design and Implementation to Impact of Quality Assurance: An Overview of Some Studies into what Impacts Improvement

Abstract

Access to university has improved following the massification of the Australian higher education sector which started in 1989, with the expansion being funded by a widening of the funding base. In the ten years from 1989, Australian universities enrolled an additional 231,000 students, including an extra 189,000 in undergraduate bachelor degrees. Specific equity policies have further attempted to increase opportunities for students previously excluded from higher education. This paper looks at changes in the composition of the student body, and in the patterns of university funding. Using aggregated national student data sets, some of the changes which have arisen from massification are identified, with particular consideration of designated equity groups.     

高等教育视域下的“占领华尔街”

本文试图在高等教育视域下解读"占领华尔街运动"。"占领华尔街"的直接原因是经济上的三座大山——学费上涨、就业困难、债务加重,而其深层原因在于学术资本主义横行,冲击教育公平,影响教育质量,威胁大学传统。继20世纪60年代的美国学生运动之后,时隔半个世纪,"占领华尔街运动"将再次对美国高等教育产生深刻影响。     

招生选拔模式在高等教育公平中的作用——基于中国和美国的对比分析

招生选拔过程对高等教育的公平产生着重要的影响。以中国和美国为例进行对比,不同的招生选拔模式,对高等教育公平的影响和作用是不同的。建议出台相关政策,引导考生和高校明确定位;在以分数为标准的录取原则上,补充其他考察条件;加强高校对学生经济资助的监管。     

教育过程公平的性别维度

教育过程性别公平是指从性别的维度审视教育内部的公平问题,使每一个学生不因具有某一生理性别而使其发展受到影响。教育过程的性别公平不只是关注女生的发展,而是同时关注男生与女生的发展。意志自由与选择自由是教育过程性别公平的首要原则;教育过程性别公平的最终目标是同时致力于女生与男生的最优发展,而不是致力于教育结果的性别均衡;价值多元是实现教育过程性别公平的关键;教育过程性别公平的真正实现必须同时促进四种性别认知的转变。     

澳大利亚高等教育支持法案述评

2008年,澳大利亚出台了<高等教育支持法案>修订版,该修订版进行了高等教育拨款援助和学生贷款等制度的改革,增加了弱势群体的入学机会,促进了教育公平,对我国高等教育经费制度的改革具有借鉴意义.     

美国大学生资助需求公式及对中国的启示

美国大学生资助需求公式是上世纪中期发展起来的,用于判断一个大学生是否需要资助,需要资助的金额是多少。其理论基础是高等教育成本需要家庭和社会共同分担,维护高等教育公平。其基本结构是学生入学成本减去家庭预期贡献。公式的核心内容是计算大学生家庭可以用于高等教育的资金。美国大学生资助需求公式可以为建立中国大学生资助需求公式提供借鉴。     

CHANGING SOURCES AND PATTERNS OF FINANCE FOR HIGHER EDUCATION: A REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL TRENDS

The last decade has seen considerable changes in patterns of financing higher education in both industrialized and developing countries. Financial stringency affecting public budgets, rapid growth in student numbers, and concern for both efficiency and equity have resulted in changes both in systems of financial support for students and mechanisms for funding higher education institutions. This article reviews recent changes in sources and methods of financing higher education in OECD countries, including Australia, France, Germany, Japan, Netherlands, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. It examines attempts to shift some of the financial burdens, for higher education from public to private sources, through the introduction of tuition fees and student loans, not only in industrialized countries, but also in developing ones in Africa and Asia.     

论高等学校招生来源计划编制的科学化

高等学校招生来源计划编制是高校招生工作的重要组成部分,科学、规范地编制高等学校招生来源计划,促进高等教育快速、健康、持续发展,是保证教育公平的重要举措。在介绍我国现行高等学校招生来源计划编制模式的同时,并针对招生来源计划编制中存在的问题,提出促进高校招生来源计划编制科学化的措施。     

我国高等教育大众化进程中教育公平的重要特征

高等教育公平是社会广泛关注的一个非常复杂的问题。大众化在“量”的层面促进了高等教育公平,并使高等教育公平呈现出若干重要特征,即入学机会总量增加,但区域失衡和阶层分化加剧;成本分担逐渐多元化,收费标准与人民群众承受能力之间的矛盾凸显;贫困学生资助体系初步形成,但资助的力度有待进一步加大,相关制度尚需进一步完善;政府对高等教育的扶持力度加大,但公平与效率的矛盾依然突出,地方和高校的自主性尚未充分发掘;高等教育公平逐步由“量”的公平向“质”的公平转变。为进一步促进高等教育公平,应稳步推进高等教育大众化,努力实现公平与效率的平衡,尽量缩小高等教育的区域差距,进一步深化高等教育管理体制改革,不断完善对弱势群体接受高等教育的补偿机制,扩大优质高等教育资源的供给,规范、鼓励和扶持民办高等教育的发展。     

Changing concepts of equity in transforming UK higher education: implications for future pedagogies and practices in global higher education

This paper is about changing concepts of equity in UK higher education. In particular, it charts the moves from concepts about gender equality as about women’s education as a key issue in twentieth century higher education to questions of men’s education in the twenty-first century. These changing concepts of equity are linked to wider social and economic transformations, the expansion of higher education and the growth in the knowledge economy, or what has been called ‘academic capitalism’. Feminist theorists and activists, often called second wave feminists, developed concepts of gender equality in education, including higher education in the twentieth century, and these have been incorporated into higher education and policies with the expansions of higher education, especially around notions of widening participation. Notions of widening participation in policy and practice arenas focus on equity as about social class, socio-economic disadvantage, ethnicity and race, rather than specifically on gender questions. Equity is now twinned with diversity and where gender is now invoked it is largely about young and working class men’s disadvantage in relation to higher education. In this paper, I will also provide research evidence from the UK’s Teaching and Learning Research Programme (TLRP) which has been the UK’s biggest ever initiative in education research about equity and diversity as currently conceived in UK higher education. I will show how gender has been incorporated with diversity questions and has lost its critical and feminist edge. I conclude with addressing questions about the future of higher education policies and practices to address questions of equity and diversity, attempting to counter the systemic inequalities in current forms of UK higher education. There are opportunities for developing new, critical and feminist pedagogies. More inclusive or ‘connectionist’ approaches, rather than ‘teaching to the test’, would engage socially diverse men and women students in a range of higher education subjects and settings.