Making universities a part time world

Associate Professor Kelly Linden, Charles Sturt University, has produced a well researched report "Is the problem us? Helping part-time students succeed in a full-time world" (5 August 2026). Unfortunately Professor Linden comes to the wrong conclusions and recommendations. The report points out that just over a third of domestic Australian university students are part time. These students have lower rates of success and retention, and are more likely to belong to an equity group. The report also points out Australian universities are set up primarily for full time students. I suggest the official figures understate the proportion of part time students, with many of those enrolled full time having work or family commitments, and so being effectively part time. It is not that these part time students need special support: the design of programs needs to be flipped to have them design for part time by default. All students can be offered the same quality online learning, with optional campus activities.

Professor Linden recommends more support for the part time students. I suggest this is missing the point. As most of the students are in effect, part time, online, programs should be designed for this mode of learning. This is not difficult or expensive to do, and ultimately simpler than designing for full time face to face students, then have to make special arrangements when it turns out most students are not. There should be facilitates on campus for students who can mange to get there regularly, but this should not be required or assumed by course designers. The facilities should be available for extended periods. 

These suggestions are informed by two experiences I had as a part time graduate student. As an on campus night student after work I was required to attend in person lectures, at night, in Canberra, in winter. The coffee shops and administrative offices were closed, the campus was cold and dark. We would go to the lecture and then immediately leave. I missed one lecture and asked the lecturer for notes. I was told to get them "from a friend", but I knew no one in the class, as there was no opportunity to do so. I decided to withdraw from the program, but even to do that I had take time off work during the day, when the office was open. 

My night school experience contrasts with being an online student in Canada. Despite being 13,000 km from campus, in another country, I was made to feel welcome. I could contact my instructors and the administrative staff any time. Most learning was asynchronous, and real time events were scheduled to suit those in different time zones. There were icebreaker activities to meet fellow students. Being an internaional online student was less lonely and more human, than being an on campus night student had been.

Impact Evaluation for Equity workshop

This morning I attended the Impact Evaluation for Equity workshop for Canberra universities, hosted at the Australian National University. This was organized by the Australian Centre for Student Equity and Success (ACSES). Dr Patricia Vermillion Peirce (ACSES Trials Lead) provided enthusiastic and knowledgeable will facilitation. The idea is to help with evaluation of equity practices at universities. Governments and universities spend a lot of time and money providing programs to disadvantaged groups of students, but do these programs actually work and could they be done better? This is the aim of evaluation. 

As a student of education, I was required to study evaluation techniques, but Patricia covered many more approaches I was not familiar with. One aspect which troubles me with equity issues is where universities are not implementing good teaching practices and need to make up for this with programs for students who are discriminated against as a result. If universites used the type of online, competency based, flexible, nested, RPLed and other techniques which are routine in vocational institutions, then much of the equity programs would not be required. 

In some cases universities simply need to implement what is required by law. As an example it if very simple for universities to provided closed captions on video material. As a result the law requires universities to do this. However, so cliam (falsely) that students have to request this.

Study or starve? Financial challenges of students studying in Australian and New Zealand Universities.

Greetings from "Study or starve? Financial challenges of students studying in Australian and New Zealand Universities" online from the Australian Centre for Student Equity and Success (ACSES). Professor Karen Charlton from the University of Wollongong, discussed a salutogenic approach, looking at what helped students, rather than just what the problems were. Research shows that disabled, international and indigenous students were at higher risk of financial insecuirty, which interfered with their study. This is of interest, as I was one of those students from a low SES background, who struggled at university.

A difficult issue is unpaid placements. Some professions, such as nursing, have a tradition of long placements being required. These placements are typically unpaid. In effect, universities are complicit in forcing students to work for free. Should universities ban free placements, in the expectation that employers would then be forced to pay the students.

I am on the Australian Computer Society board which sets accreditation requirements for computing degrees. The students can do project work, as an alternative to placements. This helps with international students in Canberra, who have difficulty getting a placement, paid or unpaid, due to security constraints. Perhaps other professions should be doing this.

One option which could help students would be to encourage them to commence their studies at TAFE. They could undertake a short qualification to get an entry level job, before considering university. Also making part time online the default option for university study. Students should not be made to feel bad if it happens they can't get to campus. 

Student Equity Forum at UTS

Greetings from the Student Equity Forum at University of Technology, in Sydney (slides & videos are available). I signed up because it was free, and I happen to be in Sydney. But this turns out to be a big event, both in terms of the more than 100 people present, but also the weight of the topic. Professor Mary O’Kane, chair of the Australian Universities Accord Panel, will be arressing the forum. A main aim of the day is to see that equity is addressed by the Panel.

When I arrived for lunch I did not know anyone here. This is because they are equity practitioners, whereas I am an educator. I am not exactingly sure what equity practitioners are, and feeling very much the outsider. But I did write some points on the panel issues, and made a submission to the Panel, which touches on some of the issues. My preference would be to build equity into the system, much as accessibility is, rather than have it an add-on.

Agenda for the Forum

12.00 pm: Registration and networking lunch

1.15 pm: Doors open to presentation room

1.30 pm: Keynote lecture - Student equity

2.10 pm: Presentation - Sector data analysis

2.30 pm: Q&A Panel - Responding to the Universities Accord discussion paper

3.30 pm: Closing remarks

4.00 pm: Event end & afternoon tea

Mixed Results from the Australian Demand Driven University System

The Australian Productivity Commission, released "The Demand Driven University System: A Mixed Report Card" on 17 June.  This extensive 205 page report looks at the demand driven university system Australia had from 2010 to 2017. The focus is on if this delivered better outcomes for 'equity groups'. The report found improved access for students from a low socioeconomic background, and ‘first in family’. However, participation by Indigenous people, and those from regional or remote areas, may have dropped.

Looking at key points from the report (listed below), the Commission found that "university education can be transformative", but is also costly, for the student and public funders. I suggest the non-fee cost to the student needs more emphasis. Educators tend to assume that students have nothing to do but study, however many have jobs, and family commitments.

The report found that the additional students had lower literacy, numeracy and Australian Tertiary Admission Rank. Despite this, many of these graduated and got good jobs. However, as would be expected, the dropout rate for these students was higher, with 21% receiving no qualification (9% higher than for other students).

The higher dropout rate was to be expected. This could have been addressed (and at many universities is now being addressed), through programs for those with limited literacy and numeracy, lower academic standards, and from families without experience of university. I am from a first in family generation, struggled with university study and am now assisting my students through better course design and delivery.

Another measure which could be introduced, but is not common, is nested programs. Rather than a student dropping out after several years study with no qualification, they can be given a job-relevant sub-degree qualification. The student should be then able to return later and continue their studies.

While the report found participation increased for students from a low socioeconomic background and ‘first in family’, it did not for Indigenous people, or those from regional or remote areas (the gap may have widened). I suggest that one way to address these groups, not mentioned in the report, is with high quality distance education programs. Instead, those from regional or remote areas are expected to move away from their community to campuses in larger population centers.

The alternative offered to regional and remote student, as well as those with family and work commitments, is to undertake online programs. However, these are in the main derived from urban campus courses, not suited to the remote students, and are staved of resources. It is possible to design and deliver quality online education. I studied how to do this online in North America, and now design such courses. The approach I now take to course design is to first produce an on-line module, and then add face-to-face components as required, and as resources allow. The approach which many universities take, of trying to turning a campus course into an online one, does not work as well.

The report suggests several ways to address the access issue. The last of these, I suggest, need more emphasis: "Viable alternatives in employment and vocational education and training will ensure more young people succeed." I suggest that this should be taken further, with incentives for schools and universities to integrate Vocational Training and Education (VET). One way to do this would be to transfer funding from the university system to VET, with the expectation that most students would start their studies in VET, possibly at school, and then transfer to university. The norm should be for students to have at least one VET qualifcaiton, before commencing university.

An area the report does not appear to address is the role which the quality of courses, and teaching, may have on student outcomes. Unlike the school and VET sectors, there are no legal requirements placed on universities to employ educationally qualified teaching staff. Academics had been traditionally appointed and promoted based on their research qualifications and skills, which are unrelated to teaching ability (some research suggests research experience makes for worse teachers). I suggest federal incentives, or requirements, for teaching qualifications at university would improve outcomes.

The study addressed two questions:

1. "Who are the 'additional students' who enrolled in university under the demand driven system who would not have had the opportunity in earlier periods, and what are the academic and labour market outcomes they achieved?
2. To what extent was the demand driven system more accessible to people from under-represented 'equity groups'? And what factors predict the under-representation of these groups?"

From  Productivity Commission, 2019

Key points from report (numbering added):

1. "University education can be transformative. It is also costly in terms of forgone earnings, student debt and Commonwealth outlays, so it is important that students, taxpayers and the broader community benefit from the investment. 

2. The ‘demand driven system’ in place between 2010 and 2017 was intended to increase domestic student numbers and give under‑represented groups greater access. The results were mixed. 

3. It was certainly effective in increasing numbers: the share of young people that attended university by age 22 years increased from 53 per cent in 2010 to an estimated 60 per cent in 2016, based on data from the Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth. 

4. Multivariate regression analysis shows that the ‘additional students’ — those whose attendance can be ascribed to the expansion of the system — were drawn from many backgrounds. However, compared with other students, they typically had lower literacy and numeracy and a lower Australian Tertiary Admission Rank (most had an ATAR less than 70). 

5. Many of the additional students succeeded. About half of the additional students graduated by age 23 years (with many still studying). About half of those graduates entered managerial or professional occupations, outcomes that are similar to those of other graduates. 

6. However, people that enter university with lower literacy and numeracy and a lower ATAR drop out at higher rates. By age 23 years, 21 per cent of the additional students had left university without receiving a qualification compared with 12 per cent of other students. 

7. University participation increased within some under‑represented ‘equity groups’, but not others. 

   • School students from a low socioeconomic background and ‘first in family’ students were more likely to participate in higher education following the expansion in university places. 

   • However, the participation ‘gaps’ (compared to those not in the equity group) remain for Indigenous people and for people from regional or remote areas, and may have widened. 

8. Despite the expansion, the level of participation among all these groups remains far lower than for people who do not come from disadvantaged backgrounds — a reflection of poorer average school performance and a range of cultural and environmental factors. In the latter respect, an equity group student with a given level of academic ability is still significantly less likely to attend university than their non‑equity equivalents. 

9. Overall, the demand driven system succeeded in increasing the number of students and made progress in improving equity of access. However, many are entering university ill‑prepared and struggling academically. This study suggests some areas for further policy consideration: 

   • The school system has arguably not adapted to the role needed of it to prepare more young people to succeed at university, or more broadly to meet the growing demand in the Australian economy for complex and adaptable skills. Average literacy and numeracy of school children needs to rise to fill this role, reversing the sharp falls since 2003. 

   • Children growing up in regional or remote areas with the same academic ability as their metropolitan peers continue to be much less likely to attend university. 

   • The growing risk of students dropping out of university requires attention. On average, the additional students need greater academic support to succeed. While universities had strong incentives to expand student numbers, the incentives for remedial support are weak. 

   • University will not be the best option for many. Viable alternatives in employment and vocational education and training will ensure more young people succeed."

     
     From  Productivity Commission, 2019