Abstract
This paper reports issues arising from a longitudinal study of 1991 to 2002 Australian higher education equity data. The national equity framework uses an empirical performance indicator system to monitor access, participation, success and retention of six designated equity groups. The paper examines three possible approaches for defining new groups. It finds no support for an exploratory empirical approach, or for an approach based on definitions of multiple disadvantage, but supports an approach which takes account of secondary school attendance. A case is made for a more sophisticated and contextualised approach to national reporting, to increase the responsiveness and productivity of the policy framework. While the benefits of a national equity policy framework are acknowledged, the paper proposes possibilities for new approaches to monitoring and measuring disadvantage in higher education.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 35-47 |
| Number of pages | 13 |
| Journal | Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management |
| Volume | 27 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2005 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 4 Quality Education
-
SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Investigating ten years of equity policy in Australian higher education'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver