The Critical Interventions Framework Part 3: Programs and approaches that enable equity in higher education – Equity Initiatives Impact Studies Guide

The Critical Interventions Framework Part 3: Programs and approaches that enable equity in higher education Equity Initiatives Impact Studies Guide March 2024 Anna Bennett Ryan Naylor Jo Hanley Jo Lewis Cheryl Burgess 2 The work described in this report was funded by a grant from the National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education (NCSEHE) in 2023, which became the Australian Centre for Student Equity and Success (ACSES) in February 2024. With the exception of the University logos, any material protected by a trademark and where otherwise noted, all material presented in this document is provided under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/) licence. The details of the relevant licence conditions are available on the Creative Commons website (accessible using the links provided) as is the full legal code for the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/legalcode). The document must be attributed as ‘Bennett, A., Naylor, R., Hanley, J., Lewis, J., and Burgess. C. (2024). The Critical Interventions Framework Part 3: Programs and approaches that enable equity in higher education – Equity Initiatives Impact Studies Guide. A report for the Australian Centre for Student Equity and Success, Curtin University.’ 3 Acknowledgements Thank you to the Australian Centre for Student Equity and Success (ACSES) – formerly the National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education (NCSEHE) - for supporting the research. Thank you to Professor John Phillimore and Dr Paul Koshy who provided guidance, advice and support throughout the inception and research process. We are grateful to the project coordinator, Dr Jo Hanley, research assistant, Jo Lewis, and project support, Cheryl Burgess, for their invaluable contributions to the project at all stages. Thank you for your dedication to the project. Thank you to the commitment of higher education staff, partners and stakeholders across Australia for enabling equity for people and communities as result of the work you do and your commitment to this goal. We would also like to specifically acknowledge the critical contributions of both the Equity Practitioners in Higher Education Australasia (EPHEA) and the National Association of Enabling Educators Australia (NAEEA), which strive for continuous improvement, development and support for the fields of equity and access across the country. The authors wish to acknowledge the traditions, knowledges and contributions of the First Nations people of Australia. We also pay respect to the wisdom of Elders past, present and emerging. 4 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................ 3 List of Tables .......................................................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 6 Key points and implications............................................................................................................... 6 Key findings and recommendations by life cycle stage ............................................................... 7 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 10 1.1 Rationale and limitations ........................................................................................................... 11 1.2 Key equity reviews and frameworks ......................................................................................... 12 1.3 Equity Initiatives Framework 2.0 ............................................................................................... 13 1.4 Methodology and literature findings ....................................................................................... 15 2. Policy and Sector Trends ............................................................................................................... 18 3. Pre-access ...................................................................................................................................... 24 3.1 Findings and insights ................................................................................................................... 29 3.2 Discussion of literature ................................................................................................................ 30 4. Access ............................................................................................................................................ 34 4.1 Findings and insights ................................................................................................................... 37 4.2 Discussion of literature ................................................................................................................ 38 5. Participation ................................................................................................................................... 43 5.1 Findings and insights ................................................................................................................... 45 5.2 Discussion of literature ................................................................................................................ 46 6. Attainment and Further Transition ................................................................................................. 52 6.1 Findings and insights ................................................................................................................... 52 6.2 Discussion of literature ................................................................................................................ 53 Project Bibliography ........................................................................................................................... 56 5 List of Tables Table 1: Revised Equity Initiatives Framework……………………………………………………….. 14 Table 2: Pre-access program impact studies identified during study period (June 2015 - May 2023)………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 24 Table 3: Access program impact studies identified during study period (June 2015 - May 2023)………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 34 Table 4: Participation program impact studies identified during study period (June 2015 - May 2023)………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 43 6 Executive Summary This report, known as the Equity Initiatives Impact Studies Guide, provides an overview of recent equity interventions in Australian higher education which have demonstrated effectiveness across different stages of the student life cycle for identified equity groups through published impact studies. The report also presents an updated Equity Initiatives Framework (EIF 2.0), which can be used in concert with the other resource developed during the project, the Equity Studies Library; all of which are intended for use by providers to enhance the provision and evaluation of equity programs. This project focused on evaluative studies detailing the impact of interventions or programs, to highlight the mechanisms which have enabled students from equity groups to gain access to and succeed in higher education. Without these interventions, as many of the studies discuss, it is unlikely that the various gains made for the inclusion and success of equity groups in higher education achieved so far would have occurred. Key points and implications Overall, from a high-level view, the following are shown to be critical equity enablers. ➢ Partnerships and collaborations: in Pre-access, Access and Participation stages, strong university partnerships and collaborations with schools, vocational education and training (VET), and communities and industry are shown to work to redress the significant impacts of inequalities which exist within and persist across the systems and employment sectors. ➢ Flexibility: in initiatives and learning design is required, including through engaging online resources. ➢ Inclusivity: in all programs, courses and pedagogy (including for employability). They need to be strengths-based and clearly value First Nations Australian knowledges. This is also important for enabling new knowledge to be produced (through research and innovation) in order to better serve all people’s needs. ➢ Embedded academic and other support: academic and other support embedded within courses and programs of learning ensure all students have the information, opportunity and assistance to succeed. ➢ Financial support: is effective for attracting and retaining students. Financial barriers and related impacts, such as having enough time to attend to study, appear to be the most consistently reported barrier to equity participation, progression and completion particularly during the Access and Participation stages. Key trends ➢ People from equity backgrounds continue to be under-represented in higher education, despite growth in absolute numbers. ➢ First Nations student participation in higher education has demonstrated substantial gains, while there are continued significant challenges for First Nations peoples. ➢ Institutional stratification continues to persist, particularly for students from low socioeconomic status (LSES) backgrounds and rural, regional and remote (RRR) areas in Go8 institutions, although the inclusion of First Nations students has made considerable ground. 7 ➢ Some groups—LSES, RRR and NESB—may be decreasing in participation relative to the sector as a whole. These trends also need to be considered in relation to wider financial struggles for these populations and in relation to impacts from COVID-19. ➢ Despite only slightly lower success rates, students from equity backgrounds experience lower 6-year completion rates. Despite improvements for RRR and First Nations students, 6-year completion rates for students from LSES backgrounds and students with disability have not improved. Key design principles and approaches ➢ Achieving parity will not be possible without ambitious institutional strategies for equity, especially in all pedagogy and curriculum design. ➢ Equity needs to be deeply embedded in student services. Targeted and comprehensive institutional approaches are essential. ➢ Funding and institutional structures to support First Nations students’ access and success are vital. ➢ Inclusive and equitable employability strategies need further development and should involve consultation with students. ➢ Limiting assumptions about the capability of students from disadvantaged backgrounds, described as starting early in schooling, continue to present profound limitations. Interventions which challenge stereotypes about which groups should aspire to and are capable of learning at university, make a difference to students considering higher education. ➢ Mentors, peers and role models have achieved significant impacts across the student life cycle, for showing that university is a meaningful and viable pathway for people who would otherwise not view it as an option, as well as for influencing success and completion across later stages. ➢ Many students struggle with ‘lifeload’. Approaches which provide flexible time and online learning resources to assist them in juggling multiple commitments, are essential and impactful. On-campus attendance is reported to be an issue for many students due to insurmountable accommodation, transportation and mobility costs and issues. Key findings and recommendations by life cycle stage Pre-access ➢ The majority of impact studies focus on school student engagement programs, in both primary and high school. The successful initiatives described typically involve in-school, on country and/or on campus experiences. A combination of these locations, tailored to cohort activity, was identified as ideal. ➢ There are gaps in studies about interventions for non-school leavers, suggesting there is less activity for engaging with people post-school age. ➢ Lower performing and First Nations high school students are often not presented with the same opportunities and inclusion discourses and activities as high performing and non-First Nations students to ‘imagine’ university as an option, and thereby to consider and plan for undertaking higher education. ➢ Limiting academic and career self-concept and associated lack of confidence are described as often arising from equity group stereotypes and cultural biases. These 8 need to be both prevented (preferably in early school years) and addressed through educating those in school and wider communities. ➢ A strong correlation was found between university enrolments and positive high school student-teacher relationships. Policy initiatives aimed at providing and/or improving these are likely to result in expanded and more representative university enrolments. ➢ Building strong collaborative relationships with schools may not only increase interest in university but also improve high school retention and completion, also leading to greater access to higher education. ➢ The importance of in-high school career presentations and guidance, including by industry partners, feature as important for increasing the chances of university participation amongst young people, particularly those from equity backgrounds. Access ➢ People from LSES backgrounds often do not have the means to enrol in university or are discouraged due to their perceptions of the costs vs benefits of university, especially for the years during study. Availability and promotion of scholarships, bursaries, grants and other forms of financial support can encourage students to apply to university or progress through their studies. These aids help offset the costs associated with university, including lost employment and income during study or placement. ➢ A number of studies highlighted the importance of fee-free, open access enabling programs for ensuring access and later success in undergraduate programs. ➢ Comprehensive bridging courses and orientation programs are described as effective ways to prepare non-traditional students for study. ➢ Increasingly, universities recognise the impacts of inequities of academic performance in schooling on higher education access, with many alternative schemes and approaches to entry requirements emerging to ameliorate educational disadvantage. ➢ Navigating the transition between VET and higher education institutions can be challenging, due to complex pathways, and lack of information and support. Participation and Attainment ➢ Financial hardship is often cited as a reason for discontinuing study. Day-to-day study costs, including for travel to campus, are a significant challenge. ➢ Accommodation does not feature prominently in studies, although it is widely known that lack of accommodation and housing affordability are critical issues which impact on the ability of certain groups to study. ➢ Dedicated First Nations student centres provide important academic, social, emotional and cultural supports provided by First Nations academics and staff, as well as through First Nations peers. ➢ Studies indicate that scholarships influence equity student retention, as they provide both learning and psychosocial benefits, which make a difference. Scholarships have been significantly associated with pass rates for First Nations students. 1 ➢ Students living with disability face additional challenges for university participation due to low levels of institutional inclusivity. 1 Scholarships have been significantly associated with pass rates for First Nations students; however, it is important to note that many scholarships are based on academic performance which are strongly associated with pass rates. 9 ➢ Embedding inclusive pedagogies, curriculum and support into program and course design is essential. This normalises support for all students, improving engagement, completion and success (including to employment). This is more effective than expecting students to seek out and attend extra sessions or extra-curricular support programs, which students often report lacking the time and/or confidence to engage with. Incorporating Indigenous pedagogies, knowledges and approaches is not only essential for First Nations students, but also valuable for non-First Nations students. ➢ Online access has been reported to increase the ability of students to participate in and complete units where there are challenges with attending on-campus due to cost, work and other issues, and many students with medical or mental health conditions prefer to study online, as this allows them to engage when they are able to and from the comfort of home. ➢ The literature identifies that degree requirements relating to ‘employability’, such as Work Integrated Learning (WIL), internships and placements, pose significant issues and barriers for equity students. ➢ Some studies identify that many equity students are unaware of or have difficulty accessing the social capitals (e.g., people networks) gained through extra-curricular and other networking activities that provide advantages in a competitive employment market. Awareness raising and appropriate programs and opportunities need further development. ➢ Including transition interventions for postgraduate study is very important as these pathways, such as graduate certificates and diplomas, increase in availability. This is essential for those with the work experience to gain entry but with considerable time since last study or for those without a degree (students living with disability, from First Nations or non-English speaking backgrounds (NESB), and regional and rural groups might be particularly disadvantaged from being included or completing postgraduate qualifications and also in progressing into associated levels of employment). Overall, the literature highlights that to progress equity into the future, approaches need to be embedded in an overarching equity-focused, inclusive higher education system, with policies and principles to guide institutions to prioritise and embed equity. Every unit of study and all pedagogies, curricula, approaches, supports and services across universities, need to be informed about and focused on equity. Too often, it has been the other way around, with students simply having to conform and change to survive in unchanging educational systems. Investment in equity interventions so far have provided gains across several decades. To improve impacts, there need to be more incentives to universities through policy and funding mechanisms. These do not need to be expensive or elaborate but should develop incrementally to focus on a whole of system approach, as identified in the following sections in this report. 16 within complex wider contexts of disadvantage which continuously impact students’ participation and success. The relevant literature about equity interventions was identified using three main sources: scholarly databases, specific journals and key websites which host research reports and other grey literature, including, for example, the National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education (NCSEHE), the Equity Practitioners in Higher Education Australasia (EPHEA) and the National Association of Enabling Educators of Australia (NAEEA). The inclusion criteria specified published and publicly available sources likely to include peer review or adherence to professional standards of academic research (such as journal articles, books, research reports, or institutional grey literature). Studies not focused on equity interventions in Australian institutions were excluded due to time constraints and in keeping with applicability of findings to national policy. Initial screening of the literature was conducted by title and abstract, matched to the broad inclusion criteria and imported into the project Endnote library. The literature search was conducted through the following databases: Education Research Complete/EBSCO, ProQuest/ERIC, Informit (Families & Society Collection, Humanities & Social Sciences Collection, Indigenous Collection, APAFT), and VOCEDplus (NCVER). Search terms for the project included the following core terms: • Australia, Australian • higher education, university • equity • student • initiative, intervention, program, strategy Relevant websites were also searched, including: NCSEHE, EPHEA, NAEEA, STARS, Universities Australia – Learning and Teaching Repository, Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER), and Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia (HERDSA). 368 studies were initially included in the Endnote library as making up ‘the field’. This dataset was then further screened for titles which focused on targeted equity groups and specific equity interventions or which presented useful data in relation to these. Many studies provided important details about their areas of focus (e.g., equity groups or general themes such as increasing retention), but did not include enough detail about specific interventions, evaluation and/or impact and so were filtered out. The project scope required that included literature provide enough information about interventions or approaches to enable clear understanding of impact. A total of 118 studies which provided either evidence of impact of equity interventions or offered useful data for informing decision-making were selected for inclusion in the Equity Studies Library and for synthesis in the project report. This included 89 peer reviewed journal articles and 29 research reports. These studies were subsequently reviewed for details of program implementation, evaluation methodology, and evidence of impact. Information about each study was then analysed in terms of: equity target group(s), stage(s) of the student lifecycle, program type or description, program aims, implementation details, distinct features, evaluation methodology, type of data collected, sample size, impact data and any other important outcomes or recommendations. 17 In the CIF 2, 63 impact studies were captured, using a sector survey and a literature review, with the majority of that literature published during 2013-2015. In this study, 29 interventions from 20 Australian universities were captured that provided clear evidence of impact, using the project methodology, as shown in tables 2, 3 and 4 (see below) incorporating 12 studies in the Pre-access life cycle stage, 10 in the Access stage and 7 in the Participation stage. Studies involving anonymised programs and universities were not captured in the tables. As can be seen from the tables provided in each of the life cycle sections, there are some limitations in the amount of information that can be gained through a review of literature. This is largely due to approaches to the structuring and editing of literature prepared for publication, which often requires a specific and narrowed focus on certain themes aligned to journals and reports. As a result, the full range of details that can be gained about both the interventions and their impacts are somewhat reduced and not always easy to compare. However, across the included studies it is clear that there are common methods employed to understand and measure impacts of the interventions, which point to best practice evaluation approaches, including that they: ➢ utilise mixed methods research, including both qualitative approaches and quantitative methods that reflect the norms of wider institutional and national higher education data collection methodologies (which provide student counts and rates elucidating student experience, participation and learning outcomes). Note that the literature did not include descriptions of the types of counterfactual approaches used in other sectors (such as health), which compare groups participating in an intervention with a control group that did not receive the intervention. ➢ base their analysis and findings on systematic reviews of literature; ➢ embed ongoing evaluation in their practice and design, to ensure continuous development and timely responsiveness to changing student and stakeholder needs; ➢ aim to meet a wide diversity of participants’ needs through embedding critical and gap analysis, and include consideration of diversity across geographical areas and community demographics; and ➢ ensure that students’ experiences and community needs are at the forefront of both provision and evaluation. 18 2. Policy and Sector Trends This section frames the Critical Interventions Framework 3 project report and guide to equity initiative impact studies within the trends observed in wider sector literature and the policy environment since the Critical Interventions Framework (Naylor et al., 2013) was released. Fifteen years have passed since the Bradley Review of Higher Education (Bradley et al., 2008), and over 30 years since A Fair Chance For All (Commonwealth of Australia, 1990) put in place the basic architecture governing Australia’s student equity framework. Although it is perhaps too soon to speculate about impacts arising from the changes made in the Job Ready Graduates package 4 , the intentional and equity specific policies for student equity on the basis of population parity and merit-based fairness have remained largely unchanged (Pitman, 2016), and despite calls to recognise other groups, including first-in-family, parents, refugees, Pasifika students, and care leavers, among others, more formally (Harvey, Burnheim & Brett, 2016) Since the publication of the Critical Interventions Framework (Naylor et al., 2013) and Critical Interventions Framework Part 2 (Bennett et al., 2015), however, theoretical and research perspectives have continued to develop. Awareness of the impacts of financial barriers and poverty has improved (Brownfield et al., 2020), leading to calls for increases in financial support through Youth Allowance, bursaries and microloans (O’Shea, 2023) along with increased recognition that students from equity backgrounds may be more debtand riskaverse than others (Raciti, 2019). Few systematic or broad datasets tracking financial stress among students are available, however, beyond independent studies and survey reports (e.g., Universities Australia, 2018), limiting exploration of this topic. Increased focus on employment outcomes for equity students has also been recognised as important (O’Shea, 2019; Tomaszewski et al., 2022), although again, no sector-wide data are available. Mental wellbeing (Larcombe, Baik & Finch, 2022; Naylor, 2020; Scobie & Picard, 2018) and working with students as partners and co-creators, rather than subjects, have attracted attention (Mercer-Mapstone & Bovill, 2020). Importantly, there has been increased repudiation of deficit-based models of student equity, with a resulting, albeit perhaps partial, shift to a focus on structural inequalities rather than perceived deficits in students’ abilities, perspectives or personal resources (Fredericks et al., 2022; Naylor & Mifsud, 2019), and better interrogation of an individualised understanding of equity and the compounding effects of multiple equity group membership (Tomaszewski et al., 2020). Data trends Despite theoretical and research advances, equity data (Department of Education, 2023; National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, 2023) continue to show—at best— 4 Although based on concerns about equity, there have been recent Higher Education Support Amendments to the Higher Education Support Act 2003 to ‘expand eligibility for places in demand driven higher education courses to First Nations students; and remove the current requirement that students must pass 50 per cent of the units they study to remain eligible for a Commonwealth supported place and FEE-HELP assistance and instead require higher education providers to support students to successfully complete the units of study in which they are enrolled’. https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r706 0 19 mixed results. Year-on-year variation and short-term trends further complicate data analysis. Note that data is reported as both rates and ratios. Rates refer to the percentage corresponding to that group compared to the total population (e.g., participating in university). Ratios refer to the ratio between the percentage of students in that group who are retained, pass or complete their studies, and that of the non-equity group. Ratios draw closer attention to disparities between equity groups and other students. Note these findings can be represented equivalently as percentages (93%) or ratios (0.93). A considerable lack of data exists reporting the performance of the sector in supporting and graduating women in non-traditional areas (WINTA). Participation in higher education Continued growth in student numbers as a whole means that equity groups must exceed sector-wide growth rates to make gains in access and participation rates. In most cases, this has not been achieved. Although the numbers of equity students participating in higher education has increased, gains in proportional representation have not, for most groups. Groups which have increased participation rates relative to sectoral growth are First Nations students and those studying with disabilities. The growth in participation for students with disabilities is particularly notable, having increased from 4% in 2006 to 6.4% in 2017 (the last full year of the demand driven system for admissions) to 9.4% in 2021 (the most recent data currently available). However, an increase in the number of students identifying themselves as having a disability may be at least partially due to changing social norms and understandings about disability, rather than success in attracting and supporting more students with disabilities in higher education. First Nations students have also substantially increased participation in higher education, from 1.2% in 2006 to 1.8% in 2017 to 2.1% in 2021, compared to a parity rate of 3.2% in the 2021 Australian Census (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2022). While growth in the First Nations population has undoubtedly contributed, the growth in participation rates appears to have exceeded that, with the participation ratio increasing from 63% in 2017 to 67% in 2021 (2016 Census data; Department of Education, 2023). Few gains appear to have been achieved for women in non-traditional areas (WINTA). Since 2013, participation appears to have hovered about a mean of 16% (16.1% in 2021). Participation rates for students from non-English speaking (NESB), low SES, and regional and remote backgrounds appear to be declining (although note again: the absolute numbers continue to increase, but not at the same rate as the general population, resulting in reduced participation rates). NESB participation has declined from 3.8% in 2017 to 3.3% in 2021, while the NESB population has increased, indicating a more substantial fall than these numbers suggest. Changes in the way students from low SES backgrounds and students from regional and remote areas are identified complicates long-term analysis, but both groups appear to be declining in participation from a peak in 2017 (low SES, first address SA1 measure: 17% in 2017 to 16% in 2021; regional, first address SA1 measure: 20.2% in 2017 to 18.8% in 2021). 20 Given this data as a whole, it seems difficult to conclude that efforts to increase relative participation from equity groups have been expanded enough to induce any growth, with the notable exception of First Nations students, and perhaps students with disabilities. Student retention Retention appears to demonstrate similar trends, with little substantial change. Taking the university population as a whole, retention has been largely stable across the sector since 2009, despite the increase in overall participation observed above, at an average of 82.6%, or with a slight upward trend from a low in 2017 of 81.9% to 83.4% in 2021. If such a trend exists, it is still only a minor improvement given the focus on retention across the sector. NESB students have persistently been retained at higher rates than ESB students, with a retention ratio of 1.03 in 2009, increasing to 1.04 in 2017 and 1.05 in 2020. The other groups show little significant change. Students with disabilities experienced a slight decrease in 2020 (possibly due to disproportionately increased burdens caused by Covid-19), but otherwise are stable with a retention ratio of 0.96. Low SES and regional students similarly appear stable at 0.95 (first address SA1 measures), while First Nations students appear to have a stable retention ratio of 0.89 since 2013. Students from remote backgrounds, however, have declined from a retention ratio of 0.95 in 2017 to 0.92 in 2020. Therefore, retention across the sector does not appear to have substantially improved. As has been observed since at least 2013 (Naylor et al., 2013), any disparities in retention rates are small compared to the disparities experienced in access and participation, with the exception of First Nations students and those from remote backgrounds. Success and completion Naylor et al. (2013) and Bennett at al. (2015) both observed that the success rates of students from equity groups were not substantially different from those calculated for total onshore domestic students. This continues to be the case. Sector-wide success rates have been consistent at about 87.5% since 2009, with most equity groups at (e.g., NESB, regional) or near parity (disability, low SES: 0.93). First Nations students have again been consistent, with a success ratio of 0.84 since 2013. Across the sector, six-year completion rates have declined slightly for all students since the cohort commencing in 2005, alongside increased part-time study: while the completion rate has declined from 67% in 2005 to 63% in the 2016-2021 cohort, the ‘engagement’ rate (students completed or still studying) has only decreased from 78% to 76%. With the exception of NESB, who have 6-year completion and engagement rates 5% and 6% higher than ESB students, equity-background students lag the completion rates of other students. In the case of regional students, this is by approximately 5 percentage points, but annual completion data shows an increase in regional student completion ratios from 93% in 2017 to 98% in 2021. Students from remote backgrounds show a similar trend, with a larger gap in 6year completion rates (12%), but a decreasing gap in completion ratio from 88% in 2017 to 94% in 2021 (although note this contradicts the increasing gap in retention rates for students 21 from remote backgrounds reported above). These data suggest these groups will close the gap in 6-year completion rates with metropolitan students if these trends continue. First Nations students have a much more stark gap in 6-year completion rates, compared to non-Indigenous students. The difference in the 2016 cohort was 22% for completion rates, and 17% for engagement rates, although this has increased by 6 percentage points compared to the 2005 cohort. Completion ratios for First Nations students have also increased from 62% in 2017 to 67% in 2021. There are significant improvements in this metric for First Nations students, consistent with those seen in other metrics reported here, but significant structural inequalities remain, and there is still a long way to go before parity is reached. Students from low SES backgrounds display an 8 percentage point gap in 6-year completion rates, compared to medium and high SES students (7% for engagement rates). However, completion ratios show a slight decline, from 89% in 2017 to 87% in 2021. This finding is concerning, as the group of students from low SES backgrounds shows considerable overlap with other equity groups; 55% are members of multiple equity groups. These other groups demonstrate increasing completion ratios, suggesting that outcomes for the low SES group may be diverging, and that low SES students from metropolitan, non-Indigenous, Englishspeaking backgrounds may face completion rates that are declining faster than the overall figure suggests. Six-year completion rates are not published for students with disabilities, but the completion ratio for this group appears flat at 83%. Institutional stratification There is still considerable evidence that students from low SES, regional and remote and First Nations backgrounds are excluded from the Group of Eight (Go8) universities. Enrolments in Go8 universities for low SES and regional/remote student groups, particularly, are approximately half of what would be proportional for their total enrolments, and have declined since 2017. Note this is relative to the sector average, not the population nationally; these groups are underrepresented in higher education, and further underrepresented in Go8 universities. This therefore excludes these students from many high-status or high-futureincome fields that are disproportionately taught at Go8 universities. However, Go8 institutions do enrol a somewhat higher proportion of NESB students and those with disabilities, and since 2017, First Nations enrolments have increased at more than double the rate seen in the rest of the sector. These findings are likely a result of the Go8’s academic selectivity, particularly on the basis of the ATAR (Australian Tertiary Admission Rank) (Cardak & Ryan, 2009). Go8 universities typically have higher retention rates than other institutions, and therefore may graduate a higher proportion of the equity students. However, high ATAR students in general are more likely to complete their studies (Department of Education, 2023; Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency, 2017), and there is little additional evidence that quality of teaching or support provided by these institutions makes a further difference. 22 In contrast, the other university groups provide more access for equity students, albeit with some variation. The Australian Technology Network and other universities of technology enrol higher proportions of students with disabilities, First Nations students and students from low SES backgrounds than others, but lower numbers of students from regional and remote areas, and equivalent NESB students. The Innovative Research Universities have higher enrolments from all equity groups except students with disabilities, while the Regional Universities Network has higher rates of all equity groups (particularly First Nations, low SES and regional students) except NESB students. Conclusions from the sector data Despite many years of policy focus and practical interventions, little has changed in equity student representation and outcomes at the sectoral level for most groups. Absolute numbers of equity student enrolments have increased, but only broadly in line with growth in the sector overall. Some groups—low SES, regional and remote, and NESB students—are at risk of losing ground. Far greater disparities exist in access and participation for most groups than in success and retention. Arguably, NESB students have better outcomes than ESB peers, once within the system, although this may be more to attributable to the relatively narrow sample of NESB students admitted than any equity interventions. A more representative NESB cohort may reduce this advantage. Other groups experience a typically small, but significant, disadvantage in retention, success and completion. The outcomes of students from low SES backgrounds from metropolitan, otherwise non-equity backgrounds may require focused research to disambiguate the effects of low socio-economic status from other attributes, such as regionality, on re-recruitment, completion, and compounded disadvantage (Nelson et al., 2017). These disparities have proven to be extremely stubborn; what progress has been made is typically at the margins, perhaps mediated by institutional interventions and programs, rather than significant step-change through large-scale policy changes to address inequalities. Institutional stratification, particularly demonstrated through the exclusion of low SES, First Nations, and regional and remote students from Go8 universities, continues to persist. However, the increase in First Nations participation towards sector averages among particularly Go8 institutions suggests that policy investment and incentives and strong institutional commitments and supports can make a substantial difference. Outcomes for First Nations students notably buck the trend of the other groups. Although coming from vast disparities, participation and outcomes for First Nations students have demonstrated substantial improvements across access, participation, retention, success and completion rates. This is not an uncomplicated trend, as significant barriers remain in every metric reported here. Some of this improvement is no doubt due to significant social changes concerning deficitand strength-based discussions and attitudes about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, and discussions and attitudes about social justice and reconciliation within the wider community. Some may be due to addressing structural barriers throughout the educational system, including through targeted funding and support from 23 universities. Much remains to be done. However, this demonstrates that challenging inequity in higher education is possible. Success and retention rates since 2007 have the appearance of somewhat volatile movement around a stable mean. These rates for most equity groups appear to be similarly consistent over time (although note that students from non-English speaking backgrounds and women in non-traditional areas are more likely to be retained than other students). An exception is the success rate of First Nations students, which has increased from 71.8 to 74.9 per cent over 7 years. Similarly, their retention rate has increased from 68.4 to 72.7 per cent over the same period. This may indicate that the focused support provided to these students since the Bradley review and the introduction of HEPPP funding has been effective. However, sustained, significant and systemic improvements are required before First Nations students reach the same success and retention rates as other students. 24 3. Pre-access The Pre-access stage of the student life cycle involves participants across a diverse age range, including students engaged in schooling and those who have exited compulsory education and may already be working, undertaking other forms of learning, such as training, or raising a family. For this reason, the types of programs designed to engage these groups are many and varied. The literature shows that they require carefully designed and culturally-informed approaches to build awareness about higher education, create positive relationships with university staff and students, and support the development of capable learner identities, especially given where people have previously been subject to forms of exclusion or have experienced discrimination within the education system itself. Pre-access interventions in the majority involve outreach strategies that engage school students and their related communities. They typically involve programs that are designed to support the development of knowledge about and interest in educational and career pathways, related discipline knowledge and literacies, and academic self-concept and skills. These programs are often delivered in-school/in-community for school-aged students or involve campus familiarisation/engagement activities (virtual or in-person, long or short duration) or a combination of both, with the aim of demystifying university and engendering sense of belonging and educational possibility. Table 2 provides information about 12 highlighted pre-access programs that feature in the included literature. 5 The findings section following Table 2 highlights recurring themes, important considerations, gaps and issues which were identified from the studies reviewed. It is clear from the research reviewed that impact studies about pre-access programs continue to be the most numerous compared to other stages of the student lifecycle (affirming the findings of Trinidad and Zacharias, 2017). Table 2: Pre-access program impact studies identified during study period (June 2015 – May 2023) Program, University and Reference Brief description Method and data Impact First Nations 1. Australian Indigenous Mentor Experience (AIME) Multiple: University of South Australia, Deakin University, RMIT University, Central Queensland University * O’Shea, S., McMahon, S., Priestly, A., Bodkin-Andrews, G., & Harwood, V. (2016). ‘We are history in the making and we are walking together to change things for the better’: Exploring AIME is a structured educational mentoring program which recruits mostly non-Indigenous university students to mentor Indigenous high school students with the aim of supporting them to complete high school and transition to further education and employment. Mixed – Interviews, observations and surveys with AIME staff, mentees and mentors. This article specifically considers how AIME mentors reflect upon their learning in the program and also how this pedagogic potential of mentors has been facilitated. In 2013, the Year 11–12 progression rate for AIME students was 89.7 per cent, which was significantly higher than the national Indigenous average of 71.3 per cent and also higher than the national non-Indigenous rate of 86.8 per cent. 86.8% of mentors who participated in the post-program survey stated they learnt ‘cultural and social awareness’, 80.6% learnt ‘respect of Indigenous knowledge, cultures and values’ and 67.4% 5 Note that not all studies in our dataset are included in this table because they must include clear details of the intervention, including the university, as well as about the evaluation and impacts. 25 the flows and ripples of learning in a mentoring programme for Indigenous young people. Education as Change, 20, 59-84. ‘desire to implement constructive change in your community’. The AIME model engenders a more collaborative model, working ‘with’ rather than ‘on’ people. 2. Indigenous Youth Sports Program (IYSP) Central Queensland University * Macgregor, C., Mann-Yasso, M., Wallace, S., Savage, S.-K., & Signal, T. (2015). Indigenous Youth Sports Program: widening participation for higher education. Widening Participation and Lifelong Learning, 17(1), 86-102. IYSP at CQU uses health, sports, cultural and educational activities to build confidence amongst school students, raise awareness of career and study options and become familiar with the university campus. Quantitative – Pre and post program surveys asked participants to respond to 10 questions (8 likert scale questions, 1 yes/no question and 1 select from a list). The program had 254 student participants, mean age 11.5 (± 1.1) years, with 59.3% male. IYSP successfully increased student knowledge of HE opportunities. There were statistically significant changes in perceptions (strongly agree/positive) in responses from pre to post program, with a strong increase in participants talking about potential careers. Demonstrates participation in HE could be increased using sports as a medium for career guidance and inspiration for post-school study pathways. 3. Sharing Place, Learning Together University of Melbourne Godinho, S. C., Woolley, M., Webb, J., & Winkel, K. D. (2015). Sharing Place, Learning Together: Perspectives and Reflections on an Educational Partnership Formation with a Remote Indigenous Community School. Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 44(1), 11-25. Sharing Place Learning Together project - a crosscultural partnership between the University of Melbourne (UoM) and a remote Indigenous community school situated in Western Arnhem Land which facilitated a Learning on Country program designed for Indigenous students to learn ‘on country’ through day trips and bush camps. The program aims to provide a pathway to future employment by developing students’ skills and confidence. An extension to the Learning on Country program included the ‘Learning on City’ visits to Melbourne. Qualitative – Interviews with 14 college and community members, including Traditional Owners, university staff, and teachers. Findings from interviews show key themes related to partnership enablers and capacity-building, and a range of learnings for developing cross-cultural outreach, e.g., the development of educational resources with students emerged as critical for growing the partnership, and that sustained time in the community builds currency. LSES 4. U@Uni Academy University of Technology Sydney #+ Dodd, E., Ellis, S., & Singh, S. (2023). Making the invisible, visible: a twenty-first century approach to tertiary preparation, attainment and access for student equity. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 27(2), 167-187. INCLUDES ALTERNATIVE ACCESS SCHEME U@Uni Academy, beginning at the end of Year 10 and engaging students across two years, introduces participants to the university experience with a series of on-campus and in-school touchpoints, including workshops, mentoring, tutoring and additional support. Across the two years, students are tracked in order to identify their range of skills, knowledge and experiences and to evidence their progress and learning journey. Students Quantitative – 249 students completed pre and post surveys used to assess the impact of the Summer School component of the programme which works with high school students from 20 partner schools in southwestern Sydney. Findings demonstrate the Summer School broadened participants’ career aspirations and gave them the confidence to work more positively towards their school studies with a view to going to university and improving job prospects. Authors note the merit of co-designed outreach and alternative admissions processes. 32 Aligned careers and employment information Appropriately designed and well-timed career education is an area of outreach practice which requires further attention (see Austin et al., 2022; Gore et al., 2017). Scaffolded approaches are described as important, particularly across years 7 to 10, and studies show that key influencers (peers and parents/carers) and industry representatives should feature in interventions (see D’Angelo & Dollinger, 2023). In RRR areas in particular, tangible employment possibilities (D’Angelo & Dollinger, 2023) and positive narratives about regional life were found to be important (see, e.g., Dollinger et al., 2021; Dollinger et al., 2022; Mahat et al., 2023). Engaging disciplines Some studies focused on how specific disciplines can be useful for engaging students and through which careers and educational information and guidance can be provided, for example, sports programs (see Macgregor et al.’s, 2015 study of an Indigenous sports program), STEM (Barnes et al.’s, 2022 study of an Indigenous STEM program) and creative arts interventions (see Felton, Vichie & Moore, 2016; Geagea & MacCallum, 2020; Geagea, Vernon & MacCallum, 2019). Modules The development of modules that can be embedded in curriculum (for example, early stage career education lessons as described by Mahat et al., 2023) or online modules that provide information, resources and motivational activities to increase accessible content for RRR students (see Poretti, 2019) aim to overcome barriers for cohorts who may not have access to in-community widening participation outreach or campus immersion experiences. Participants Some interventions are aimed at capturing a diverse range of non-traditional/ disadvantaged student groups, while others focused specifically on First Nations students (see, e.g., Barney’s 2022, overview study) and/or RRR students (see Fray et al.’s, 2020 literature review). Impact studies about pre-access interventions specific to students with disability or WINTA (although see Michell et al., 2018) were not identified during the search period. This gap in research on pre-access programs for particular equity groups is notable for future work. Influencers Involving teachers and families to support the potentials of all students and of each person’s ability to learn and change over time as a result of learning new things in new ways is essential (see Brown et al., 2020; Gore et al., 2015). A small number of studies looked at the importance of teachers in nurturing awareness about aspiration (see Prieto et al.’s, 2022 study on teacher professional development and Duckworth et al.’s, 2016 evaluation of a program to support non-traditional students entering education degrees). Gore et al.’s (2015) study demonstrated the significance of teacherstudent relationships for post-school transitions. 33 Building the capacity of key higher education influencers in RRR areas is described as an important whole-of-community approach which can support students’ education and career pathway choices (see Kilpatrick et al., 2022). Mentoring Mentor programs also featured as valuable, especially for specific groups (see O’Shea, 2016 and Cairnduff, 2015 regarding the value for First Nations students, and Heberlein, 2020 and Lynch, Walker-Gibbs and Herbert, 2015 on the need for increasing access to mentors and role models for RRR students). Evaluation Evaluation of impact for continuous program improvements is described as essential, with pre and post surveying being a widely-used approach (see, e.g., Barnes et al., 2022; Cairnduff, 2015; Lynch, Walker-Gibbs & Herbert, 2015; Macgregor et al., 2015). In the studies reviewed, mixed methods were typical for data collection and the inclusion of responses from multiple stakeholders was also apparent (e.g., Austin et al., 2022; Barnes et al., 2022). Comparison of populations exposed to widening participation programs versus those who were not, as in Raciti and Dale’s (2019) study of university students, is also useful for building the knowledge base on pre-access interventions. Individual tracking of students in order to identify and support skills and interests as well as program impact is discussed in Dodd et al. (2023), although perhaps easiest to implement in programs with smaller numbers. The practice of continuing post-program engagement is identified as important in one study about an Indigenous on-campus school holiday camp (Barney & Williams, 2021), an idea which has merit for all equity groups. 34 4. Access The Access stage of the student life cycle represents a critical transition point where individuals are making important decisions about entering higher education and investing time and resources in preparing themselves for university study. University pathways (enabling and bridging programs), other entry qualifications such as VET, admission strategies for widening participation, and guidance to support student decision-making about appropriate program choice aligned with career destinations, are shown to be key for equity students, with differences in need for school-leaver and non-school leaver groups. Table 3 highlights 10 access interventions identified by impact studies. 6 The findings section following highlights recurring themes and important considerations or gaps and issues which were identified from the studies reviewed. Table 3: Access program impact studies identified during study period (June 2015 - May 2023) Program/Initiative Brief description Methods and data Impact First Nations 1. K-Track Murdoch University Bennett, R., Strehlow, K., & Hill, B. (2022). Myth-busting in an Aboriginal pre-university enabling program: Embedding transformative learning pedagogy. Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 51(1), 119. Murdoch's K-Track is a pathways program for First Nations students takes a holistic approach to learning. The program is designed to help students with academic skills and other core skills that enable success, such as time management, communication skills, critical thinking, and mindfulness practices. Mixed – Analyses student weekly reflections across 7 iterations of K-Track and compares student data (2005-2017) with the original program (KATEC). Since the implementation of Ktrack, the total completion rate of the program increased from 6% in KATEC to 39% in K-Track. Transitions into undergraduate study from K-Track were also significantly higher than KATEC. Enrolment into STEM degrees tripled. 2. Preparation for Tertiary Success (PTS) Program Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Education * Hall, L. (2015). What are the key ingredients for an effective and successful tertiary enabling program for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students?: An evaluation of the evolution of one program. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 55(2), 242264. The PTS program aims to teach students necessary academic skills to successfully navigate tertiary study. PTS is delivered to First Nations students Australia wide and is released in blocks where students attend campus for periods of time. Quantitative – Program data from a period of 8 years was extracted and analysed to compare course enrolments and completions between course iterations. The iteration of PTS analysed had increased completion rates (2012, 30%) compared to the old version of the program (2007, 9%). Student completion is likely to be a result of holistic, learner centred curriculum and pedagogy, meaningful and culturally relevant content, strong learning relationships and engagement with a twenty first century learning environment. LSES 3. The Foundations Studies Program University of South Australia The Foundations Studies Program is a one-year enabling program where students undertake core courses focused on Qualitative – Interviews with students were undertaken to explore experiences and transition into enabling programs and into degree The programs allowed students to overcome obstacles associated with traditional university entry and gave them 6 Note that not all studies in our dataset are included in this table because they must include clear details of the intervention, including the university, as well as about the evaluation and impacts. 35 Habel et al. (2016). Exploring the Experience of Low-SES Students via Enabling Pathways. Perth: National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education. academic literacy, English language studies, individual and group skills, information literacy and research skills and electives aligned to their preferred undergraduate program. Students earn a GPA across the year which they can use to apply for entry into an undergraduate program. study via an enabling pathway. confidence in being a student and capacity to succeed. 4. University Preparatory Program (UPP) University of Adelaide Habel et al. (2016). Exploring the Experience of Low-SES Students via Enabling Pathways. Perth: National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education. UPP is an enabling program comprised of core courses and electives, designed to give access to a degree program upon completion of the required core courses. Qualitative – Interviews with students were undertaken to explore experiences and transition into enabling programs and into degree study via an enabling pathway. The program gave students confidence to talk to other students, building necessary skills, self-efficacy, and an overall basis for moving into their degree program. 5. Early Offer Year 12 (E12) University of Sydney Ng, F., Shirley, D., Willis, K., Lewis, S., & Lincoln, M. (2015). The E12 experience: students' perceptions of a widening participation scheme. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 6(1), 35-47. The E12 program is a widening participation scheme targeting LSES students by offering a lowered entry score, conditional offer prior to final high school examinations, transition support, and a first-year scholarship. Mixed – Interviews with 9 students in the Faculty of Health Sciences across Semester 1 and 2 combined with analysis of student grades and achievements. Found that E12 enabled students to study at University of Sydney or in an undergraduate program where previously it was not an option due to the competitive nature of entry. 6. The Learning Centre 110 (TLC110) Murdoch University Vernon, L., Watson, S. J., Moore, W., & Seddon, S. (2019). University enabling programs while still at school: supporting the transition of low-SES students from high school to university. The Australian Educational Researcher, 46, 489509. The Learning Centre 110 (TLC110) is a Year 12 embedded enabling pathway program aimed to widen participation in higher education by reducing the gaps between desires to go to university, expectations of studying at university and belief of obtaining a university degree. This study investigates whether school satisfaction and increased desire for university differed based on pathway of study: traditional ATAR pathway vs TLC110. On completion of TLC110, students were provided opportunities to study at university. Mixed – Study 1 involved students at 18 schools in outer metropolitan Perth (n=257; 58% female). Students taking either an ATAR path (n=176) or enabling program (n=81) took the Murdoch Tertiary Aspirations Survey at the start and finish of the school year. Study 2 involved focus groups with students who completed TLC110 in the previous 2 years (n=9, female = 8). There was a high degree of association between desires and expectations for university study for ATAR participants (rT1 = 0.81, p < 0.05; rT2 = 0.82, p < 0.05), whereas for the TLC110 group, the associations between desires and expectations were weaker (rT1 = 0.30, p < 0.05; rT2 = 0.55, p < 0.05). Teacher encouragement was significantly associated with school satisfaction and engagement for both groups; however, the magnitude of the association was greater for the TLC110 group (r = 0.46, p < 0.05) compared to the ATAR group (r = 0.27, p < 0.05). Focus groups showed that TLC110 attendance helped to improve students’ confidence and belief in their abilities stemming from prior academic results and relational engagement in school. 36 Multiple 7. Open Foundation University of Newcastle Bennett, A., Motta, S. C., Hamilton, E., Burgess, C., Relf, B., Gray, K., Leroy-Dyer, S., & Albright, J. (2016). Enabling Pedagogies: A participatory conceptual mapping of practices at the University of Newcastle, Australia. Newcastle, Centre of Excellence for Equity in Higher Education. Open Foundation is the largest and longest running enabling program in Australia. The program employs enabling philosophy and pedagogy coupled with wrap-around services to support preparation, develop academic skills and build student confidence. In its current form, students undertake 4 disciplinebased courses of their choice and, on passing, are guaranteed entry into numerous undergraduate degrees or gain entry to higher ranked degrees if they score suitably. Mixed – Literature review, document analysis, interviews with teaching staff representative of discipline areas (n=30) and with past and current students (n=21), and reflective data from 7 research team workshops (n=8 academics). Findings show that enabling pedagogies are effective for both student preparation and access to HE by creating engaging teaching environments where epistemic access and academic success are achieved through connecting new disciplinary knowledge with students’ existing knowledge, as well as making explicit the underlying approaches and principles involved in university study, including the hidden curriculum, and allowing students to renarrativise and prove themselves as capable learners. 8. OnTrack Enabling Program Murdoch University Lisciandro, J. G. (2022). First-Year University Retention and Academic Performance of NonTraditional Students Entering via an Australian Pre-University Enabling Program. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 62(2), 167-201. OnTrack delivers high and sustained in-program retention and conversion to undergraduate enrolment. Quantitative – Data was obtained from Murdoch student records, with students differentiated on basis of admission pathway, including OnTrack. Demographic, retention and academic data from these students were analysed. A greater proportion of transitioning students via OnTrack were from equity backgrounds, demonstrating an important function of this enabling program. OnTrack students were retained at university at a rate similar or better than students entering via other admission pathways. 9. QUTeach Queensland University of Technology Duckworth, V., Thomas, L., & Bland, D. (2016). Joining the dots between teacher education and widening participation in higher education. Research in PostCompulsory Education, 21(3), 260277. QUTeach aims to increase the numbers of teachers from LSES and non-white backgrounds, and involves students across years 11 and 12 (nominated on the basis of ability in English and an interest in a career in teaching) undertaking 4 first-year Bachelor of Education subjects. Students passing at least 2 of the 4 subjects studied received guaranteed entry to a range of undergraduate programs with fees for subjects undertaken during the program were waived and credit given for each subject passed. Qualitative – Student participant interviews carried out in 2009. 25 students across 5 high schools were involved in the program. Of the initial intake, 16 were offered guaranteed entry to the university. Evaluation showed that the program was successful in several ways with many participants stating that, without QUTeach, they would not have considered university, with some reporting that they would not have applied for a teaching course as they would not expect to obtain a sufficiently high school qualification. While still at school, key influencing features including: an introduction to university learning, a strong focus on academic writing, support from university staff, access to the university library, amongst other things. RRR 10. University Preparation Program (UPP) University of Tasmania UPP aims to provide HE access to mature-aged individuals in the Cradle Coast region of Tasmania which experiences low Mixed – Surveys and follow up semi-structured interviews were employed to explore outcomes of participation in UPP. The program allowed students to study for a range of reasons; to explore different life paths, for personal development, and to gain new opportunities. 37 Johns, S., Crawford, N., Hawkins, C., Jarvis, L., Harris, M., & McCormack, D. (2016). Unlocking the potential within: A preliminary study of individual and community outcomes from a university enabling program in rural Australia. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 56(1), 69-88. levels of educational attainment. Content focuses on academic skills, written and oral communication, critical thinking and numeracy as well as allowing students to familiarise themselves with university culture. UPP was shown to be an accessible local option that prepared mature-aged students for further study and employment opportunities that they may not otherwise have accessed. Discussion of program also found in: * Barney, K. (2021). Building a stronger evidence base to support effective outreach strategies for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students: Increasing impact and university participation. Perth: National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education. Total: 10 4.1 Findings and insights Overall, the following key insights and equity mechanisms were identified in the literature as important. ➢ Students from LSES and other disadvantaged backgrounds often do not have the financial means to participate in or continue with university study. ➢ Non-ATAR pathways and admissions schemes are increasing, especially for those in equity groups. ➢ Engaging students from First Nations backgrounds and in RRR areas in university study, and especially in STEM and STEM-related fields, requires attention. ➢ The lack of studies on interventions which focus on students from non-English speaking backgrounds, students from RRR locations and WINTA means there is a gap in understanding the Access stage. ➢ Teacher, parent and peer expectations are key to influencing the understanding that one is able to participate in university learning. Limiting views which are often socioculturally biased require interventions, as they significantly contribute to barriers to equity of access. ➢ Comprehensive access and pathways strategies and structures which coordinate effective mechanisms, including orientation, enabling and bridging programs, supports and services, are described as effective ways to enable students to engage with university and prepare for success in study. Types of interventions ➢ School and community collaborations and partnerships are key to universities enabling access for students from disadvantaged groups. ➢ Government financial support and timely promotion of scholarships, bursaries, grants and other forms are vital. ➢ VET to higher education pathways need to be strengthened and redesigned, including utilising university-based free enabling units or courses to facilitate the transition where retention and performance issues occur. ➢ Pre-university enabling programs are shown to be effective for engaging students from equity groups to ensure they are able to prepare and qualify for entry to university and succeed in their studies. In most cases, this approach provides a free experience of university and preparation before students enrol. Students from equity 38 groups report that these pathways allow them to trial if university is the right path for them. ➢ Supporting students and their families and communities to better understand university is essential. ➢ A choice of on-campus and online access and supports is required to reach and include a diversity of students from all backgrounds, with online being especially important for those in RRR areas. Most studies explore: • factors in access interventions which drive success, retention and attrition rates; • barriers to accessing higher education; • demystifying university life and students; • highlighting access to university services; • the success of enabling programs; • gathering and analysis of student experiences of access; and • continuous feedback from students to enable responsive redesign of access interventions. 4.2 Discussion of literature Collaboration between universities, high schools and communities Building strong collaborative relationships between universities and high schools is likely to increase high school retention and completion, and rates of progression to higher education. It is highly recommended that engagement efforts commence as early as possible in school, beginning at least with students in Year 7 (see, e.g., Dang et al., 2016). Relationships between universities and regional and remote communities are important, particularly for First Nations peoples, given that many regard university as beyond reach or a complex transition away from family and friends (O’Shea et al., 2019). Regional and remote populations in general need to be understood for their multidimensionality and variety of needs, including for high quality online learning (see O’Shea et al., 2019). Diversity of need in terms of geographical areas and demographics should be part of continuous forms of enquiry and review. A strong correlation was found between university enrolments and positive student-teacher relationships in school (see, e.g., Tomaszewski, Perales & Xiang, 2017) and also in enabling programs (Hall, 2015). Initiatives aimed at providing and/or improving student-teacher relationships for access outcomes are likely to result in expanded and more representative university enrolments. Financial support The literature suggests there is a need to develop a more nuanced and sophisticated understanding of the role of financial support in mitigating the disadvantages faced by students from low SES backgrounds (see Burke et al., 2023; Reed & Hurd, 2016). Equity scholarships are identified as providing the opportunity for a better work-study balance for students. However, as Burke et al. (2023) argue, government funding should seek to address financial hardships impacting on access and completion, and not expect scholarships alone 39 to address this issue, as the research shows many scholarships are subject to prior performance requirements (i.e., are based on merit from schooling) which means they are widely inaccessible to those from equity groups who have also experienced inequities in schooling. Campus familiarisation University familiarisation and on-campus experiences are powerful for non-traditional students learning about what university environments, staff and students are like, in order to disrupt rigid stereotypes about university being elitist and disconnected from wider society and people like them. Programs work best if they are people-rich, including peer-supported activities, and involve demonstrator/facilitator training along with mentors and positive role models (e.g., Smith, Trinidad & Larkin, 2015), to inspire belonging, develop engagement and confidence, and enable academic success (see, e.g., Beltman, Samani & Ala’I, 2017; Naidoo, 2015). Online and other support High quality, inclusive and supportive online education is essential for ensuring equity of access to higher education. A considerable number of RRR students want the option to participate in on-campus activities and/or subjects but many also need to have access to sustained, tailored online support (see, e.g., Cairnduff, 2015). Online enabling programs are important, as are other online university programs, to enable access, particularly for more significantly disadvantaged groups who cannot afford to travel to campus for all classes, have unpredictable work shifts, have disabilities, health issues, caring responsibilities, and especially for those from RRR areas. Stone, King and Ronan (2022) assert that Regional University Centres (RUCs) play a critical role. For example, approximately half of students included in their study reported that they would be more likely to consider studying online with the support of an RUC – soon to be part of an expanded system, the Regional University Study Hubs (RUSH). Stone et al. (2022) recommend that Australian universities build closer connections with RUCs to raise awareness across high schools and the broader local community in RRR areas of the potential for regional study through online study options with the support of these hubs. Access schemes Increasingly, universities recognise the correlation between socio-economic and other inequities on school academic performance and resultant impact on university access, with schemes and approaches emerging to ameliorate educational disadvantage. This is provided through inclusive admission and pathways programs, units and schemes. Non-ATAR pathways and admissions schemes are growing, especially for those in equity groups. Access is an important step, but the literature shows that generally students entering from non-traditional non-ATAR pathways experience lower retention rates, grades and outcomes (see, e.g., Li, Carroll & Jackson, 2022). Li et al. (2022) identify that students who enter university via a non-ATAR pathway report less positive experiences at university. Enabling pathways Studies assert that enabling pathways (see, e.g., Johns et al., 2016) are well-placed to address issues of access. Students accessing university via enabling pathways generally experience better first-year retention rates than those articulating via most other sub- 40 bachelor pathways, and report higher rates of satisfaction in comparison with VET pathways, including in terms of being prepared for university (see Pitman et al., 2016; Li et al., 2022). Enabling and bridging programs are shown to be effective for re-engaging students in learning, with most describing a commitment to and including a focus on significant numbers of students from equity groups, through inclusive (often called ‘enabling’) pedagogies, programs and curriculum design, which support both participation and success at university (see, e.g., Syme et al., 2022; Bennett et al., 2016). Student-centred and strategic approaches focused on equity, including implanting more equitable approaches to assessment scheduling and flexibility, which is the key mechanism that enables access to a degree, is critical for pathways programs (see, e.g., Willans & Seary, 2018). Ensuring such interventions are always learner-centred and based on meaningful and culturally relevant content and engagement, with contemporary online/technologyenhanced learning environments, are described as essential (see, e.g., Hall, 2015; Osborne et al., 2019). Leveraging and expanding open access enabling pathways for widening participation, particularly for First Nations students, is described as important, and ensuring that the admission process to such programs is not exclusionary is a critical part of upholding equity of access (see, e.g., Baker, Ulpen & Irwin, 2021) given merit or performance (including interview) based interventions are fraught with subtle and invisible biases which reproduce disadvantage. For First Nations students, Frawley et al. (2017) argue that the second-chance opportunity and the university preparation that enabling programs provide are an essential part of this prominent pathway into university, but pathways from VET to higher education are still overly complex and difficult to navigate, including through enabling pathways, given the lack of clarity and clear visibility for facilitating Indigenous student transitions across the country. Inclusive and Indigenous pedagogies and educational design Incorporating Indigenous pedagogies, knowledges and approaches is described as particularly important for First Nations students. For example, Fredericks et al. (2015) report that developing cultural identity and recognising the cultural capital of all participants impacts self-esteem and confidence through a ‘both-ways philosophy of education’ is important for best practice in First Nations access education, along with developing other forms for navigating institutional systems. Embedding engaging content and approaches from and respectful of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous learning approaches, are found to be important (Hall, 2015). University environments should be culturally and physically safe, with all students, especially those from First Nations backgrounds, feeling respected and comfortable. Challenging stereotypes about learning capacity Approaches which are designed to challenge deficit myths, and limiting beliefs and stereotypes about the educational capacity of people from non-traditional backgrounds are critical, particularly for First Nations peoples, and for these to be implemented in multiple locations, across communities, families, schools and universities. Concerningly, both teachers and students have reported believing that some people are not ‘smart enough’ to enrol at university (see, e.g., Dang et al., 2016). Limiting self-concept and lack of confidence arising 41 from cultural biases and discrimination need to be prevented before they develop or addressed if they do, through initiatives that challenge and educate communities, students and staff (see, e.g., Dang et al., 2016; Prieto et al., 2022). Based on limiting views of student academic capacity, the provision of career guidance in schools is also described as impacting access to higher education for many. For example, Tomaszewski et al. (2017) found that students from low SES backgrounds are less likely to receive the types of career guidance and sessions which would support decisions to enrol at university. For First Nations school students, some teachers’ low expectations, described as especially low in subjects such as mathematics (see Dang et al., 2016), and bias, play a role in preventing students from considering university and/or they are often not presented with the same opportunities as non-Indigenous students to explore a pathway into higher education. As Rutherford, McCalman and Bainbridge (2019) identify, the expectations of parents and peers are important factors driving intention to attend university. Fredericks et al. (2015) argue that producing feelings of success, allaying fears, and increasing self-acceptance and self-worth, through a supportive learning environment in First Nations access programs works to ameliorate damaging self-concept about academic capability coming from school/peers and/or home. Initiatives which educate students and families to have high expectations of themselves and their teachers, and to acknowledge and then move past negative learning experiences to improve future experiences, are identified as critical. Interventions which clearly value all students’ participation, convey that they belong, and work to empower them with the expectation that they can succeed in higher education are also essential (see, e.g., Syme et al., 2022; Bennett et al., 2016). Institutional strategies and structures Equity needs to be deeply rooted within every university’s academic strategy and practices, and integrated into curriculum and other relevant processes, funding and initiatives. This includes help with each step from pre-enrolment, enrolment (which is recognised as being more daunting and complex in universities than in other educational systems) and transition (see, e.g., Elsom, Greenaway & Marshman, 2017; O’Shea et al., 2019). Equity outcomes will then form an integral part of the governance and resource allocation processes within the university, including an institutional evaluation framework which explores activities and impacts across the whole student life cycle using methods that identify participation, success, retention, and graduate destinations, as well as broader engagement, participant experiences and insights, with senior leaders driving implementation across the institution to achieve and maximise impacts (see Falconer, 2019). Policy, funding and institutional structures which provide holistic approaches to supporting students, especially important for First Nations students, to both access and succeed in higher education (see, e.g., Rutherford et al., 2019), including the provision of financial support through scholarships, are described as important from entry to graduation and within postgraduate study (see, e.g., Reed & Hurd, 2016). Participants Students studying STEM from equity groups entering via non-ATAR interventions are identified by Li et al. (2022) as being most disadvantaged. This is especially the case for First Nations 48 and institutional scholarships increase their participation and success (see Devlin & McKay, 2018). Scholarships influence equity student retention and pass rates, as they provide both material living, learning and psychosocial benefits, which make a difference, particularly for First Nations students (see Ng et al., 2015; Almeida, Ranabahu & Verma, 2022; Uink et al. 2022). However, financial supports need to be provided in time for students to be able to cover the living costs of commencing study and the cost of course materials. Recipients have reported that having a scholarship made them feel supported by the university and gave them a sense of belonging. Even a relatively small scholarship amount influences equity student retention, having practical and psychosocial benefits, with the exception of students 'doubly disadvantaged' (e.g., from RRR areas, with relocation expenses and loss of social networks during transition to university) who often require additional support due to the loss of multiple sources of support (Zacharias & Ryan, 2021). Zacharias and Ryan (2021) found that scholarships targeting students with demonstrated high need and the greatest risk of attrition, had a particularly positive effect on retention rates. Additionally, the selection criteria for scholarships influences student retention and success outcomes more than the scholarship 'product' itself because, for example, meritbased criteria are subject to achievement and selection biases. That is, these programs may reward individuals who would have succeeded irrespective of being awarded the scholarship, while excluding those who require such support to adequately demonstrate the academic 'merit' initially needed. Students have reported they experienced WIL-related financial hardship which affected their wellbeing and reduced enjoyment of their placement. Lloyd et al. (2019) suggest that to reduce the strain of WIL on student wellbeing, universities should partner with industry and, importantly, remove or reduce the barrier to completion set up by the need for students to complete hours or units in order to complete their degree. The expectations of professional accreditation also have an important role in creating, and potentially addressing, these barriers to completion in many disciplines. A substantial number of students need to travel long distances to do placements, with lack of accommodation or affordable accommodation identified as challenging (see Clerke et al., 2021; Andrewartha et al., 2022). Many students suggest that universities lack understanding or do not care, and that placement affects their usual employment, in terms of them either being unable to work, losing their jobs or negatively affecting their employer relationships. A ‘living wage’ remuneration (potentially a government responsibility rather than a university one), and equity targets for WIL engineering placements, and less intensive and more flexible models of WIL, if unpaid placements are unavoidable, and reducing the ‘hours’ needed for graduation requirement, are all described as important (see Clerke et al., 2021; Lloyd et al., 2019). First Nations educational design and support Support from First Nations academics and staff is reported as critical to First Nations students remaining at and completing university. Culturally inclusive courses assist with student retention, redressing various forms of racism and discrimination (including and often seemingly inadvertent due to lack of training and understanding). Fredericks et al. (2022) 49 report that, to ameliorate issues, teaching and learning should involve First Nations perspectives and engagement with Indigenous knowledges and cultures. This can be achieved through ongoing cultural competency training of staff and students which enable culturally enriched knowledges and learning, and safety for First Nations students. Recognising discriminatory and exclusionary structural and cultural practices in and beyond education and actions which address and challenge them are required (see, e.g., Lin et al., 2021). Uink et al. (2022) identifies the Indigenous Tutorial Assistance Scheme (ITAS) as a highly utilised service associated with positive pass rates for First Nations students. On-campus First Nations student centres (of various kinds appropriate to context) are essential for providing important academic, social, emotional and cultural supports. These structures include provision of peer networking which allow First Nations students to build meaningful relationships and connect with other First Nations students. Flexibility in course delivery modes (internal/external, full-time/part-time) also provide the flexibility required by students to achieve academically so they can modify their mode of study according to personal needs (Taylor et al., 2019). Taylor et al. (2019) found that discrimination and racism are the most pervasive and debilitating barriers to successful course completion, and family support as the most frequent enabler of retention, in providing emotional, financial and physical support. They found that where this is not available, students experience stress, loneliness, isolation and financial hardship. Inclusive educational design and pedagogy Although extra-curricular and more generic learning support are important for addressing issues experienced by some equity students, more inclusive and responsive courses and pedagogies across the board are reported as essential for retention and completion. Inclusive pedagogy is found to make a substantial difference to student success, allowing students to be active and interactive (see, e.g., Devlin & McKay, 2019). Learning and assessments that are relatable and 'real-world' based, are described as more engaging and meaningful for effective learning. So too, teaching staff who are available, responsive, caring and solutions-focused are reported by students to be fundamental to their success (see Groves & O’Shea, 2019). Staff understanding and responding to the circumstances and needs of students is therefore important. Being flexible around life, work and family pressures, being empathetic, and checking in on students to make sure they know someone ‘cares’, are identified as facilitating student success (Groves & O’Shea, 2019). Approaches which assist busy students with juggling multiple commitments, with classes, assessments and placements, and have flexible time structures, are described by students as very helpful. Innovative approaches, such as providing an assessment submission period (rather than a specific date) and automated reminders, have been identified as assisting students to effectively manage study in the context of other competing roles and responsibilities (see, e.g., Ebert et al., 2021). Technology-enhanced teaching is also identified as an important way to make learning available at the places and times students require, given they are often very time poor. Flexibility in mode of study and allowing students to change according to work and personal needs which occur over a term are described as important. Time flexibility (see Hughes, Corcoran & Slee, 2016), is identified as crucial, and the requirement of in-class attendance 50 presenting a barrier for many (often due to transportation and/or mobility issues, and fatigue related to other commitments and financial issues). Online Online study is chosen by many students for the essential flexibility it offers, so they can learn where and when they need to, around work, care for children and other responsibilities (see Stone et al., 2016). Online access is about providing equity of opportunity, so institutions need to provide effective and tailored resources, approaches and supports, rather than privilege on-campus students. However, challenges include: issues with accessing some online sites and poor internet. Students with medical issues, including mental health, have reported a preference for studying online due to mobility and other reasons, and that this option has assisted them in their study (see Kent, 2016; Hughes et al., 2016). Benefits include allowing them the flexibility to study self-paced, when they are able to and from the comfort of home. Online study has been reported as making a substantial impact on many students being able to complete units. Disability and disclosure A small number of studies focused on students with disability and ways to understand and improve student experience and retention (see, e.g., Kilpatrick et al., 2017). Rooney (2019) found universities often reinforce deficit views of people with disability through positioning them as problematic. Students have reported a lack of knowledge about disability amongst teaching and academic support staff, with some perceived as holding assumptions of reduced individual capacity (see Rooney, 2019). Staff training is therefore essential, as is involving students with different types of disability in policy and practice development is key (Kilpatrick et al., 2017). Moving from aspirations to practice means equity of experience and participation in higher education must be embedded throughout all parts of an institution (Rooney, 2019). Some recommendations identified by students with disabilities include: online courses be selfpaced, including for assessments, there be provision of alternative assessments, clearer instructions of expectations of coursework, personal mentoring, and access to extensions if required. More recognition and accommodation of the needs of students with a disability, other than just extra time, are noted. For example, offering a study period which allows for more breaks for students to recuperate from fatigue and physical issues is identified as important (Kent, 2016). A disability friendly environment which is welcoming and accommodating to this community and the development of online fora for students with disabilities are also highlighted as important. Student reasons for not disclosing their disability include: feeling shame and feelings of inadequacy, feeling as though their disability is not apparent enough to warrant support, or because they want to be taken seriously. Students with mental health issues often do not disclose due to stigma and fear of discrimination, or because of a lack of awareness of disclosure procedures. On the other hand, students with disability have also identified the benefits of peer support and engagement with student services in order to mitigate any feelings of inadequacy or negative learning experiences. Having someone to advocate for 51 them, who can understand and represent their interests, is described as making a difference to their experience of university. WINTA Interventions are needed to improve the rates of retention and completion in the WINTA group and to attract more women into STEM subjects. For example, Bennett, Bawa and Ananthram (2019) report that WINTA are more likely to drop-out of their studies than men. They argue that more effort and initiatives are required to attract greater numbers of women and improve these rates, including within employability-focused learning and initiatives. Lloyd et al. (2019) point out that for Work Integrated Learning, WINTA are also often subject to prejudice and biases which are discriminatory. Re-engagement Re-engaging and re-recruiting cohorts who withdraw from studies is discussed as important, given that when attempting to return to study, students have reported being stigmatised or feeling stigmatised due their 'drop-out' status or they found the process of applying for credit for prior learning was too complex (see Harvey & Szalkowicz, 2017). Instead, as Harvey and Szalkowicz (2017) suggest, this cohort should be considered an alumni subset or as partial completers who should be re-engaged with given their previous units of achievement and for providing recognition of learning, which is especially important for providing equitable participation because a high proportion of those who leave are from equity backgrounds. Outreach to students on a leave of absence (LOA) may reduce the risk of attrition, given that contact with them has shown a positive effect on re-engagement (Naylor, Cox & Cakitaki, 2023). Evaluation Mixed methods approaches were most commonly used to draw on the richness and variety of qualitative and quantitative data to better understand participation trends as well as student experiences and insights, including: • institutional data • sector data • national datasets • other studies with large datasets or larger scale projects • case studies • surveys • online self-assessments • semi-structured interviews • in-depth bibliographical interviews 52 6. Attainment and Further Transition The Attainment and Further Transition life cycle stage involves a critical point in student decision-making where employment, further study or a combination of both are made. Further study may be at university or through other providers depending on career/employment demands but where postgraduate programs are concerned it is important to acknowledge that some equity students may encounter barriers similar to those experienced at the Access and Participation stages of the life cycle. In terms of post-degree career pathways, it is critical that graduates from equity backgrounds are able to find employment in their chosen field, otherwise the time, effort and cost associated with attaining their qualification goes unrewarded, this having implications for future equity students who are making decisions about whether to go to university. This section provides a brief discussion of literature associated with Attainment and Further Transition. As there were no programs specific to this reframed life cycle stage that featured in the included literature during the search period, there is no table included. However, it should be noted that interventions and activities outlined in a number of studies associated with the Participation stage of the student life cycle, have significant bearing on rates of student completion and graduate employability, for example WIL, career guidance and other employability initiatives, and post-qualification destinations. The small number of studies drawn on here about barriers and enablers for equity groups are discussed in relation to challenges and recommendations for students at the Attainment and Further Transition into employment and/or further study stage. 6.1 Findings and insights It is clear from the literature search across the study period (June 2015-May 2023) that there are limited studies which include sufficient information about an intervention, the approach to evaluation and impacts, supporting equity students in the final life cycle stage. This does not mean that there are no programs across the sector aimed at supporting students to complete their qualifications and transition to employment and/or further studies, but that there has been limited research on or dissemination of the impact of these interventions. The findings discussed in this section are important for illuminating some of the barriers and enablers for equity student completions (at degree or HDR level), as well as implications for employability. However, due to the low numbers of impact studies found, it is not possible to reach strong conclusions about best approaches and strategies to support targeted students. The literature on the Participation stage suggests that students from equity groups are much less likely to participate in activities which increase employability due to lack of time, financial resources, paid work, and fear of discrimination, meaning that they can be disadvantaged in finding work as graduates. The following points emerged from the literature about Attainment and Further Transition: ➢ Many graduates from equity groups have expressed a sense of being underprepared for employment in their field. 53 ➢ Perceptions of English language proficiency and lack of permanent residency or ongoing work rights, contribute to an unwillingness on the part of many employers to fairly consider students from NESB. Greater funding and development of initiatives or programs for this group, as well as addressing and targeting others from equity groups, are required. ➢ Barriers to attracting and retaining First Nations students in Higher Degree Research (HDR) programs include discrimination, cultural and social isolation, and a shortage of First Nations mentors/academics. These factors also impact completion rates. ➢ Meaningful student-supervisor relationships allow First Nations HDR students to succeed. Supervisors who are supportive and culturally sensitive are essential. ➢ Employment of more First Nations supervisors and involving Elders in supervisory processes are likely to have a positive impact on students. ➢ Despite the significant increase in postgraduate pathways from degrees and work to graduate certificates and graduate diplomas over recent years, they did not feature in any studies found. For the same reasons as other pathways and from the points made in the literature regarding challenges, it is highly likely that students embarking on this part of the student journey would benefit from academic bridging and supports, especially for those entering without a degree or those gaining access to postgraduate pathways based on work experience but where significant time has lapsed since last studying. 6.2 Discussion of literature Employability Students from equity groups are less likely to participate in employability activities during their studies due to lack of time, financial resources, obligation to paid work and fear of discrimination. Therefore, equitable employability strategies are important for universities to develop and need to involve students in design. However, providing students with the choice to either focus more on employability or a broader education focus, depending on their needs and ambitions, is argued by Andrewartha and Harvey (2017b) to be important. Activities targeted to equity groups are required, including developing placements and internships, more employer networking events, careers fairs, professional mentoring opportunities, increased access to extra-curricular opportunities, integration of employability into compulsory units, and increased funding to provide more careers advisors and services to support employability for these groups. Many graduates from equity backgrounds have expressed how unprepared they felt for employment. Some assume that a degree is all that is required to compete in gaining the employment aligned to their degree (see O’Shea, 2023). Groves, O’Shea and Delahunty (2022) found that students who are first in family (FIF) report difficulty in finding a job in their degree field. Some students who are FIF are unaware of or do not have the social capitals (e.g., people networks) nor the connections gained through extra-curricular activities, required to gain an advantage in a competitive employment market. Students who are FIF often do not have the family contacts and connections which enable them to gain employment after their degree. 54 Some equity students have reported a low sense of belonging and self-confidence in the employment context (see Groves et al., 2022). Therefore, as Groves et al. (2022) argue, students should be made aware of the critical approaches and activities for gaining employment, including extra-curricular activities and networking during a degree. Making such hidden knowledges explicit is crucial. Student union leadership positions and management of clubs and societies, enables students to learn transferrable skills which could improve employability. Student union careers services are identified by Andrewartha and Harvey (2017b) as an important way to increase employability. Participation in clubs and societies with low or no cost, are found by Andrewartha and Harvey (2017b) to assist in building positive relationships, which is considered beneficial for improving a student’s marks and providing networks related to work after graduation. Analysing the labour market outcomes of university graduates from equity groups, Li et al. (2017) argue that greater support needs to be provided through policies encouraging access to and completion of higher education. They raise concern that some groups, particularly NESB and WINTA, may be discriminated against, finding, for example, that although STEM graduates are employed at higher rates than non-STEM graduates, higher paying STEM jobs are male dominated. In order to ensure all groups are provided with opportunities for employment, equal employment policies should be enforced and monitored. Newman et al. (2022) found that few universities offer career guidance and WIL specifically for CALD students, as well as insufficient resources and programs. Perceptions of English language proficiency and lack of permanent residency or ongoing work rights, contribute to an unwillingness on the part of many employers to fairly consider CALD students. Greater funding and development of initiatives or programs for this group are required. Postgraduate study Hutchings et al. (2019) report that barriers to attracting and retaining First Nations students in Higher Degree Research (HDR) programs include: institutional racism and discrimination, lack of spaces in universities conducive to effective learning, cultural and social isolation for students, as well as lack of First Nations mentors/academics. In addition, Hutchings et al. (2019) argue, meaningful student-supervisor relationships are essential for First Nations HDR students to succeed. Supervisors who are supportive and culturally sensitive are required, so employment of more First Nations supervisors and involving Elders in supervisory processes are likely to have a positive impact on students. Individual tailored approaches to recognising First Nations HDR student needs and providing responsive support as required throughout different stages, are essential. Learning and other important supports Studies have found that very few universities provide adequate support for postgraduate students, especially First Nations HDR students (Hutchings et al., 2019). However, regular and ongoing workshops and support groups, including peer support, and ensuring that scholarships information is available and put in place in good time, are all identified as critical for equity students to participate and succeed. 55 More support in the transition to postgraduate study, as well as for student employability are required during this last but very important stage of the student life cycle. This is a critical stage, given that attainment and employment are the drivers for engaging in higher education in the first place. This is also true for the increasing numbers of people who are interested in and enrol in postgraduate pathways and programs. 56 Project Bibliography 8 ACIL Allen Consulting. (2017). Evaluation of the Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program. https://docs.education.gov.au/node/43911 Almeida, S., Ranabahu, N., & Verma, R. (2022). Reducing inequality through institutional action: Towards a process framework for student transition and support. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning, 12(6), 1138-1153. https://doi.org/10.1108/HESWBL-07-20210148 Andrewartha, L., & Harvey, A. (2017a). Employability and student equity in higher education: The role of university careers services. Australian Journal of Career Development, 26(2), 71-80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1038416217718365 Andrewartha, L., & Harvey, A. (2017b). Student Voice and Influence on Employability in Australian Higher Education. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 8(1), 202-214. https://doi.org/10.21153/jtlge2017vol8no1art657 Andrewartha, L., Knight, E., Simpson, A., & Beattie, H. (2022). A balancing act: Supporting students who are parents to succeed in Australian higher education. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University & Centre for Higher Education Equity and Diversity Research, La Trobe University. https://www.ncsehe.edu.au/wpcontent/uploads/2022/02/Andrewartha_LaTrobe_Final.pdf Austin, K., O'Shea, S., Groves, O., & Lamanna, J. (2022). Best-practice career education for students from low socioeconomic status backgrounds: Final report. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2022). People. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Retrieved 23 May from https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people Baker, S., Irwin, E., Hamilton, E., & Birman, H. (2022). What Do We Know about Enabling Education as an Alternative Pathway into Australian Higher Education, and What More Do We Need to Know? A Meta-Scoping Study. Research Papers in Education, 37(3), 321-343. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2020.1849369 Baker, S., Ulpen, T., & Irwin, E. (2021). A viable equity mechanism for all?: Exploring the diversity of entry requirements and supports in Australian enabling education. Higher Education Research & Development, 40(5), 932-946. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360. 2020.1801600 Barnes, E. C., Jamie, I. M., Vemulpad, S. R., Breckenridge, D., Froud, A. E., Harrington, D. G., Packer, J. M., Prenzler, P. D., Bedgood, D. R., Jr., & Jamie, J. F. (2022). National Indigenous Science Education Program (NISEP): Outreach Strategies that Facilitate Inclusion. Journal of Chemical Education, 99(1), 245-251. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00393 8 This reference list constitutes all literature used in the project, including that which appears in this Report as well as the Equity Studies Library. 57 Barney, K. (2018). Community gets you through: Success factors contributing to the retention of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Higher Degree by Research (HDR) students. Student Success, 9(4), 13-23. https://doi.org/10.5204/ssj.v9i4.654 Barney, K. (2021). Building a stronger evidence base to support effective outreach strategies for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students: Increasing impact and university participation. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University. https://www.ncsehe.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Barney_UQ_ EquityFellowship_FINAL.pdf Barney, K., & Williams, H. (2021). "A Stepping Stone That Just Pushed Me Further Into Wanting to Go to University": Student Perspectives on 'What Works' for Effective Outreach Strategies for Indigenous Students. Student Success, 12(2), 8-17. https://doi.org/10.5204/ssj.1913 Beltman, S., Samani, S., & Ala'i, K. (2017). Mentoring Programs and Equity Groups: The Australian Story. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University. Bennett, A. (2018). Access and Equity Programme Provision-Evaluation in Australian Higher Education: A What Matters Approach. Educational Research and Evaluation, 24(8), 523537. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2019.1643740 Bennett, A., Motta, S. C., Hamilton, E., Burgess, C., Relf, B., Gray, K., Leroy-Dyer, S., & Albright, J. (2016). Enabling Pedagogies: A participatory conceptual mapping of practices at the University of Newcastle, Australia. Centre of Excellence for Equity in Higher Education, University of Newcastle. http://hdl.handle.net/1959.13/1389907 Bennett, A., Naylor, R., Mellor, K., Brett, M., Gore, J., Harvey, A., James, R., Munn, B., Smith, M., & Whitty, G. (2015). Equity Initiatives in Australian Higher Education: A Review of Evidence of Impact. Report prepared for the Department of Education and Training. University of Newcastle, University of Melbourne and La Trobe University. Bennett, D., Bawa, S., & Ananthram, S. (2021). Gendered Differences in Perceived Employability among Higher Education Students in STEM and Non-STEM Disciplines. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 25(3), 84-90. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603108.2020.1871090 Bennett, R., Strehlow, K., & Hill, B. (2022). Myth-busting in an Aboriginal pre-university enabling program: Embedding transformative learning pedagogy. Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 51(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.55146/ajie.2022.24 Bradley, D., Noonan, P., Nugent, H., & Scales, B. (2008). Review of Australian higher education: Final report. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. Brown, B., Avitaia, S., Austin, K., & Facchin, J. (2020). “Having a yarn”: From one rural student to another, practical in-school programs demystifying university and enabling student progression. Australian and International Journal of Rural Education, 30(1), 18-32. https://doi.org/10.47381/aijre.v30i1.251 64 Martin, L. M. (1994). Equity and General Performance Indicators in Higher Education. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. Mercer-Mapstone, L., & Bovill, C. (2020). Equity and diversity in institutional approaches to student–staff partnership schemes in higher education. Studies in higher education, 45(12), 2541-2557. Michell, D., Szabo, C., Falkner, K., & Szorenyi, A. (2018). Towards a socio-ecological framework to address gender inequity in computer science. Computers & Education, 126, 324-333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.019 Naidoo, L. (2015). Refugee Transition: School-University Partnerships that Support Refugee Students’ Participation in Tertiary Education. The Journal of the World Universities Forum, 8, 15-22. https://doi.org/10.18848/1835-2030/CGP/v08i01/56783 National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education. (2023). National data. Curtin University. Retrieved 22 May from https://www.ncsehe.edu.au/data/national-data/ Naylor, R. (2020). Key factors influencing psychological distress in university students: the effects of tertiary entrance scores. Studies in higher education, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1776245 Naylor, R., Baik, C., & James, R. (2013). A Critical Interventions Framework for advancing equity in Australian higher education. Report prepared for the Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education. Centre for the study of higher education, University of Melbourne. Naylor, R., Cox, S., & Cakitaki, B. (2023). Personalised outreach to students on leave of absence to reduce attrition risk. Australian Educational Researcher (Springer Science & Business Media B.V.), 50(2), 433-451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-021-00503-2 Naylor, R., & Mifsud, N. (2019). Towards a structural inequality framework for student retention and success. Higher Education Research & Development, 39(2), 259-272. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1670143 Nelson, K. J., Picton, C., McMillan, J., Edwards, D., Devlin, M., & Martin, K. (2017). Understanding completion patterns of equity students in regional universities. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University. Newman, A., Baker, S., Due, C., & Dunwoodie, K. (2022). Career Guidance for Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Migrants and/or Refugees. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University. https://www.ncsehe.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/ 2022/02/Newman_Deakin_CALDMR_FINAL.pdf Ng, F., Shirley, D., Willis, K., Lewis, S., & Lincoln, M. (2015). The E12 experience: Students' perceptions of a widening participation scheme. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 6(1), 35-47. https://doi.org/10.5204/intjfyhe.v6i1.260 65 O’Shea, S. (2023). ‘It was like navigating uncharted waters’: Exposing the hidden capitals and capabilities of the graduate marketplace. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 45(2), 126-139. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080x.2023.2180161 O’Shea, S. (2023, May 19). These 5 equity ideas should be at the heart of the Universities Accord. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/these-5-equity-ideas-should-be-atthe-heart-of-the-universities-accord-203418 O'Shea, S. (2020). Crossing boundaries: rethinking the ways that first-in-family students navigate 'barriers' to higher education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 41(1), 95110. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2019.1668746 O’Shea, S. (2019). Mind the gap! Exploring the post-graduation outcomes and employment mobility of individuals who are first in their family to complete a university degree: Literature review. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University. O'Shea, S., McMahon, S., Priestly, A., Bodkin-Andrews, G., & Harwood, V. (2016). 'We are history in the making and we are walking together to change things for the better': Exploring the flows and ripples of learning in a mentoring programme for Indigenous young people. Education as Change, 20, 59-84. O'Shea, S., Southgate, E., Jardine, A., Smith, S., & Delahunty, J. (2019). Shifts in space and self: Moving from community to university. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University. Oketch, M., McCowan, T., & Schendel, R. (2014). The impact of tertiary education on development: A rigorous literature review. UK: Department for International Development. Osborne, S., Paige, K., Hattam, R., Rigney, L.-I., & Morrison, A. (2019). Strengthening Australian Aboriginal Participation in University STEM Programs: A Northern Territory Perspective. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 40(1), 49-67. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 07256868.2018.1552574 Patfield, S., Gore, J., & Weaver, N. (2022). On 'being first': The case for first-generation status in Australian higher education equity policy. The Australian Educational Researcher, 49(1), 23-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-020-00428-2 Pitman, T. (2016). Understanding ‘fairness’ in student selection: Are there differences and does it make a difference anyway? Studies in higher education, 41(7), 1203-1216. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.968545 Pitman, T. (2022). Supporting persons with disabilities to succeed in higher education: Final report. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University. Pitman, T., Trinidad, S., Devlin, M., Harvey, A., Brett, M., & McKay, J. (2016). Pathways to higher education: The efficacy of enabling and sub-bachelor pathways for disadvantaged students. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University. 66 Pollard, L. (2018). Remote Student University Success: An Analysis of Policy and Practice. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University. Poretti, L. (2019). Increasing regional student participation in higher education through innovative university outreach. Access: Critical explorations of equity in higher education, 6(1), 80-95. https://www.newcastle.edu.au/research/centre/ceehe/access-criticalexplorations-of-equity-in-higher-education Prieto, E., Sincock, K., Patfield, S., Fray, L., & Gore, J. (2022). New possibilities for engaging school teachers in widening participation: Professional development to support student aspirations. The Australian Educational Researcher, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384022-00592-7 Raciti, M. (2019). Career construction, future work and the perceived risks of going to university for young people from low SES backgrounds. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University. Raciti, M. M., & Dale, J. (2019). Are university widening participation activities just-in-time or just-out-of-time? Exploring the (mis)alignment between the timing of widening participation activities and university decision-making among students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. Student Success, 10(1), 47-58. https://doi.org/10.5204/ssj.v10i1.923 Reading, J. (2016). Providing Enhanced Information Skills Support to Students From Disadvantaged Backgrounds: Western Sydney University Library Outreach Program. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42(6), 694-704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib. 2016.08.002 Reed, R. J., & Hurd, B. (2016). A Value beyond Money? Assessing the Impact of Equity Scholarships: From Access to Success. Studies in Higher Education, 41(7), 1236-1250. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.968541 Rigney, L.-I., & Neill, B. (2018). Higher Education Outcomes for Indigenous Australians: Barriers and Enablers to Participation and Completion. Centre for Research in Social Inclusion and Education, University of South Australia. Robinson, M., Tomaszewski, W., Kubler, M., Johnstone, M., Clague, D., Zajac, T., Povey, J., Salom, C. (2021). The Student Equity in Higher Education Evaluation Framework: Final Report. Institute for Social Science Research, University of Queensland. Rooney, C. (2019). Listening to other voices: Building inclusion of higher education students with disability from the ground up. Access: Critical explorations of equity in higher education, 6(1), 37-47. https://www.newcastle.edu.au/research/centre/ceehe/accesscritical-explorations-of-equity-in-higher-education Rutherford, K., McCalman, J., & Bainbridge, R. (2019). The post-schooling transitions of remote Indigenous secondary school graduates: A systematic scoping review of support strategies. Australian and International Journal of Rural Education, 29(2), 8-25. 67 Scobie, H., & Picard, M. (2018). Embedding mental wellbeing in Australian regional universities: Equity interventions. International Studies in Widening Participation, 5(1), 65-79. Shergold, P., Calma, T., Russo, S., Walton, P., Westacott, J., Zoellner, D., & O'Reilly, P. (2020). Looking to the Future - Report of the review of senior secondary pathways into work, further education and training. Education Council. Skene, J., Pollard, L., & House, H. (2016). Aspire UWA: A case study of widening access in Higher Education. Student Success, 7(2), 11-20. https://doi.org/10.5204/ssj.v7i2.337 Smith, J., Trinidad, S., & Larkin, S. (2015). Participation in higher education in Australia among under-represented groups: what can we learn from the Higher Education Participation Program to better support Indigenous learners? Learning Communities: International Journal of Learning in Social Contexts [Special Issue: Indigenous Pathways and Transitions into Higher Education], 17, 12-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.18793/LCJ2015.17.02 Stone, C., King, S., & Ronan, C. (2022). Taking University to the Students: Forging Connections and Inclusion Through Regional University Centres (RUCs). Student Success, 13(3), 46-53. https://doi.org/10.5204/ssj.2434 Stone, C., O'Shea, S., May, J., Delahunty, J., & Partington, Z. (2016). Opportunity through online learning: Experiences of first-in-family students in online open-entry higher education. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 56(2), 146-169. Syme, S., Roche, T., Goode, E., & Crandon, E. (2022). Transforming lives: the power of an Australian enabling education. Higher Education Research & Development, 41(7), 24262440. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2021.1990222 Taylor, E. V., Lalovic, A., & Thompson, S. C. (2019). Beyond enrolments: a systematic review exploring the factors affecting the retention of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health students in the tertiary education system. International Journal for Equity in Health, 18(1), 136. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-019-1038-7 Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency. (2017). Characteristics of Australian higher education providers and their relation to first-year student attrition Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency. http://hdl.voced.edu.au/10707/430198 Tomaszewski, W., Kubler, M., Perales, F., Clague, D., Xiang, N., & Johnstone, M. (2020). Investigating the effects of cumulative factors of disadvantage: Final report. Institute for Social Science Research, University of Queensland. Tomaszewski, W., Perales, F., & Xiang, N. (2017). Career guidance, school experiences and the university participation of young people from low socio-economic backgrounds. International Journal of Educational Research, 85, 11-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.ijer.2017.06.003 Tomaszewski, W., Perales, F., Xiang, N., & Kubler, M. (2022). Differences in Higher Education Access, Participation and Outcomes by Socioeconomic Background: A Life Course Perspective. In J. Baxter, J. Lam, J. Povey, R. Lee, & S. R. Zubrick (Eds.), Family Dynamics 68 over the Life Course: Foundations, Turning Points and Outcomes (pp. 133-155). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-12224-8_7 Trinidad, S., & Zacharias, N. (2017). Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program: Seven years on. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University. https://www.ncsehe.edu.au/higher-education-participation-and-partnershipsprogram-seven-years-on/ Uink, B., Bennett, R., Hill, B., van der Berg, C., & Rolfe, J. (2022). Interrogating relationships between student support initiatives and Indigenous student progression. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University. Universities Australia. (2018). 2017 Universities Australia student finances survey. Universities Australia. University of Technology Sydney (UTS). (2020). UTS Social Impact Progress Report. https://www.uts.edu.au/sites/default/files/2020-06/D1%20SIP%20Report.pdf Usher, K., Fagan, A., Brown, J. A., Mather, C., Marlow, A., Power, T., van de Mortel, T., West, C., Hutchinson, M., Zhao, L., Terry, V., Woods, C., & Lea, J. (2022). The financial challenges for Australian nursing students attending placement-based work-integrated learning. Collegian, 29(2), 154-160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colegn.2021.07.005 Vernon, L., Watson, S. J., & Taggart, A. (2018). University aspirational pathways for metropolitan and regional students: Implications for supporting school-university outreach partnerships. Australian and International Journal of Rural Education, 28(1), 87-103. Vernon, L., Watson, S. J., Moore, W., & Seddon, S. (2019). University enabling programs while still at school: Supporting the transition of low-SES students from high school to university. Australian Educational Researcher, 46(3), 489-509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-018-02885 Vickers, M., McCarthy, F., & Zammit, K. (2017). Peer mentoring and intercultural understanding: Support for refugee-background and immigrant students beginning university study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 60, 198-209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2017.04.015 Wilks, J., Fleeton, E. R., & Wilson, K. (2017). Indigenous Tutorial Assistance Scheme: Tertiary Tuition and beyond: Transitioning with strengths and promoting opportunities. Australian Universities Review, 59(1), 14-23. Willans, J., & Seary, K. (2018). "Why did we lose them and what could we have done"? Student Success, 9(1), 47-60. https://doi.org/10.5204/ssj.v9i1.432 Zacharias, N., & Mitchell, G. (2020). The importance of highly engaged school-university partnerships in widening participation outreach. Student Success, 11(1), 35-45. https://doi.org/10.5204/ssj.v11i1.1458 69 Zacharias, N., & Ryan, J. (2021). Moving beyond 'acts of faith': Effective scholarships for equity students. Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, 43(2), 147-165. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2020.1777499 Zacharias, N., Cherednichenko, B., Ryan, J., George, K., & Gasparini, L. (2016). Moving beyond ‘acts of faith’: Effective scholarships for equity students. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University. Zacharias, N., Mitchell, G., Raciti, M., Koshy, P., Li, I., Costello, D., & Trinidad, S. (2018). Widening Regional and Remote Participation: Interrogating the Impact of Outreach Programs across Queensland. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University.