Low socio-economic status (SES) background remains the most prevalent marker of disadvantage and is often compounded by other factors. Regional and Indigenous students, for example, are much more likely to be from low SES backgrounds than other Australians. Despite the massification of the system, the introduction of the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS), and the establishment of targeted funding to support 'A fair chance for all' (indexed at TD/ERD 87.195 and also referred to hereafter as the Framework) objectives, inequality has remained stubborn. Throughout the past 25 years, the
... Show more
Low socio-economic status (SES) background remains the most prevalent marker of disadvantage and is often compounded by other factors. Regional and Indigenous students, for example, are much more likely to be from low SES backgrounds than other Australians. Despite the massification of the system, the introduction of the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS), and the establishment of targeted funding to support 'A fair chance for all' (indexed at TD/ERD 87.195 and also referred to hereafter as the Framework) objectives, inequality has remained stubborn. Throughout the past 25 years, the number of low SES university participants has risen substantially, but the overall low SES proportion of the university share has not. In this chapter the authors consider the impact of the Framework's targets and strategies, and more recent targets established for the low SES cohort by the Australian Government following the Bradley review of higher education (indexed at TD/LMR 85.696). 'A fair chance for all' enabled SES to be measured consistently for the first time within higher education, generating important data, debate and policies to address structural inequities within Australian society. Despite these strengths, the effects of class remain highly visible. Limitations of language and measurement are evident within the Framework, and greater structural and cultural reform is required to increase representation and outcomes, particularly of students from the lowest socio-economic backgrounds. The authors canvass potential strategies required to achieve this reform, including: refocussing on school achievement through need-based funding, curriculum reform, and university outreach; expanding enabling programs and alternative entry pathways; and increasing the understanding of diverse student backgrounds.
Edited published abstract.
Show less
