Search

Like other western nations such as the United States and the United Kingdom, Australia's record of education outcomes for marginalized groups is troubling, whether the comparisons are made within the nation or with other OECD nations. Although recent Australian Governments have sought to overhaul funding for schools and universities, on their own, more resources for educational institutions are not enough to redress problems of disadvantage and to achieve social justice. Also required is a focus on the pedagogic work (PW) of teachers and, by implication, their teacher educators. Central to this article is the argument that pedagogy is the most strategic place to begin this work because of its location as a central message system in education. In this article we conceive of PW as comprising of "belief," "design," and "action." From these are derived three principles on which to build a socially inclusive pedagogy that creates opportunities for all students, whatever their circumstances, to participate more fully in education. Our focus on advancing a conceptual understanding of socially inclusive pedagogy is informed by a theory and politics of transformation, which seek to engage with the deep structures that generate injustice within schools and teacher education.

Aspirations for higher education by people from low socioeconomic status backgrounds are now a focus of government policy in many OECD nations. This is part of a global trend emphasizing the perceived benefits of "raising" aspirations among under-represented groups as a social inclusion strategy to widen university participation, but also ultimately as a strategy to increase national competitiveness in the global knowledge economy. Yet despite its importance, aspiration tends to carry simplistic meanings in much higher education policy and practice. This paper attempts to craft a more nuanced account of the term, informed by four concept-clusters derived from sociological and philosophical literatures and research, and with a more mutual relation of public and private interests. It complements this "intellectual craftsmanship" or "systematic reflection" (Mills in "The sociological imagination," 1959) with data drawn from a future-focused survey of secondary school students from low and low-mid socioeconomic status backgrounds in regional Australia. Results from the survey provide illustrations that help expand understandings of student aspirations for higher education, from a group presumed to be deficit in aspirations.

This article provides a synoptic account of historically changing conceptions and practices of social justice in Australian higher education policy. It maps the changes in this policy arena, beginning with the period following the Second World War and concluding with an analysis of the most recent policy proposals of the Bradley Review. Concurrently, it explores the different meanings ascribed to social justice, equity and social inclusion over this time span and what these have meant and will mean for students, particularly those from low socio-economic backgrounds. It concludes that a relational understanding of social justice--"recognitive justice"--is yet to inform student equity policy in higher education, although this is now what is required in the context of the planned shift from mass to universal participation. (Contains 1 table, 1 figure and 5 notes.)

Aspiration for higher education (HE) is no longer a matter solely for students and their families. With OECD nations seeking to position themselves more competitively in the global knowledge economy, the need for more knowledge workers has led to plans to expand their HE systems to near universal levels. In Australia, this has required the government and institutions to enlist students who traditionally have not seen university as contributing to their imagined and desired futures. However, this paper suggests that failing to appreciate the aspirations of different groups, understood as a collective cultural capacity, casts doubt over the ability of institutions to deliver increased numbers of knowledge workers. Moreover, inciting subscription to the current norms of HE is a weak form of social inclusion. Stronger forms of equity strategy are possible when HE is repositioned as a resource for different groups and communities to access in the pursuit of their aspirations.

In the global phenomenon of widening participation policy in higher education, lower retention rates for students from less advantaged socio-economic circumstances have potential to undermine the social inclusion agenda of HE. This might be an issue in Europe but is not necessarily the case elsewhere. In this paper we consider statistical data on Australian university students from under-represented groups, retained at similar rates to those of their more advantaged peers. Our data also include print and online media commentary on student retention. In our analysis we draw on Bourdieu’s social theory, particularly his conceptual tools of ‘cultural capital’ and field ‘distinction’. We argue that less-advantaged Australian university students appear to have greater access to the cultural capital privileged in higher education institutions. This tends to undermine claims of retention problems, and of ‘setting up students to fail’, which dominate quasi-policy media forums and have more to do with mitigating a perceived threat to the distinctive character of higher education. Following Wilkinson and Pickett’s observations on the distribution of economic capital within societies, we suggest that the more even the distribution of cultural capital across systems, institutions and groups, the less students’ socio-economic status has to do with their retention in higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the notion of a ‘just imaginary’ for social inclusion in higher education. It responds to the current strategy of OECD nations to expand higher education and increase graduate numbers, as a way of securing a competitive advantage in the global knowledge economy. The Australian higher education system provides the case for analysis. Three dilemmas for social inclusion policy in this context are identified: questions of sustainability, aspiration and opportunity. The paper argues that while social inclusion policy has ‘first-order’ effects in higher education, ajustimaginary is required for more inclusive ‘second-order’ effects to be realized. It concludes that transformation of the current imaginary will require a more robust theorization of relations between social inclusion and higher education, to give new and unifying meaning to existing practices and to generate new ones. Short of this, social inclusion may be little more than justimaginary. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Student transition into higher education has increased in importance in recent times, with the growing trend in Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development nations towards universal higher education provision and the concomitant widening of participation to include previously under-represented groups. However, ‘transition’ as a concept is largely employed uncritically in the field. In making these transition assumptions explicit, this article argues that there are three distinct accounts in the research literature, which inevitably lead to different approaches to transition policy, research and practice in higher education. While the third – transition as ‘becoming’ – offers the most theoretically sophisticated and student-sympathetic account, it is the least prevalent and least well understood. The article further argues that future research in the field needs to foreground students' lived realities and to broaden its theoretical and empirical base if students' capabilities to navigate change are to be fully understood and resourced. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The Bradley Review of Australian Higher Education provided a timely reminder of the dismal performance of the nation and its higher education system in terms of the proportional representation of certain groups of Australians within the university student population. While the Australian Government has taken on the challenge of creating more university places for people from low socioeconomic status backgrounds, this article makes the case for creating spaces in higher education for marginalised Australians. Specifically, we argue that the most strategic place to begin this is with the pedagogic work of higher education, because of its positioning as a central message system in education. And it is from the centre that the greatest pedagogic authority is derived. In this paper we conceive of the pedagogic work involved in terms of belief, design and action. From these constitutive elements are derived three principles on which to build a socially inclusive pedagogy and to open up spaces for currently marginalised groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides a synoptic account of historically changing conceptions and practices of social justice in Australian higher education policy. It maps the changes in this policy arena, beginning with the period following the Second World War and concluding with an analysis of the most recent policy proposals of the Bradley Review. Concurrently, it explores the different meanings ascribed to social justice, equity and social inclusion over this time span and what these have meant and will mean for students, particularly those from low socio-economic backgrounds. It concludes that a relational understanding of social justice - 'recognitive justice' - is yet to inform student equity policy in higher education, although this is now what is required in the context of the planned shift from mass to universal participation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]