The road to 80%: Lowering barriers to higher education for a better future

What would the future look like if four in five working age Australians had completed tertiary education, and what’s needed to achieve such a goal?

One of the key ambitions put forward in the Australian Universities Accord is the expansion of higher education participation and attainment, with the target that 80% of Australia’s working age population achieve tertiary education by 2050 – up from 60% in 2023.

To achieve this, some 80% of the uplift would need to come from historically under-represented groups and communities: students of a First Nations background, regional and remote students, students with disability and students from the lowest quartile of the socio-economic spectrum.^[1]

The case for pursuing this goal is underscored by the Productivity Commission’s recent research on economic mobility which demonstrates the power of education to deliver transformational change, break inter-generational cycles of disadvantage and drive socio-economic uplift and opportunity.

However, recent trends show enrolments among these priority groups are flat or declining.^[2]  That’s to say, recent trends must be reversed if the Accord target is to be achieved. The nature of this challenge – and the extent of the response required – is evident in the array of barriers these individuals often confront. Researchers at the University of Newcastle recently showed that nearly half of students who would be the first-in-family to enter university face intersecting disadvantage.^[3] 

Encouragingly, we see wonderful examples of institutions helping students overcome these barriers to enrolment and – critically – complete their studies. And the Accord’s priority actions suggest the policy architecture is headed in the right direction, with new programs and funding changes designed to lower barriers across the student journey.

However, if there’s anything to be taken from history, and from success stories elsewhere in education and globally, is that only through truly concerted effort can we meaningfully improve participation and outcomes among under-represented groups. From individual institutions to the system itself, the response must be exhaustive in the measures taken to overcome the barriers these students face over the entirety of the student journey.

If the system is to be held accountable for achieving goals that support improved outcomes for underrepresented student groups, then the policy architecture must be both comprehensive and harmonious in the way it overcomes, enables, incentivises and rewards. There’s high stakes design work to finalise, and implementation will be the determining factor.

Individual institutions, in pursuing their mission, face and must respond to a range of localised pressures, priorities and contextual factors. Where support for students facing barriers sits in the hierarchy for a given institution, and whether it receives the attention it requires, can vary. With the right signals, support and incentives from the policy sphere, there’s every reason to believe best practice can become common practice. Achieving this will not only help ensure the Australian economy is equipped with the skills it needs, but also help deliver the intergenerational transformation we know higher education is capable of delivering.   

References:

 1. The Accord targets do not call for an increase in the rate of participation among students with disability, owing to the fact that it is considered on par with expectations. However, sources like the NCCD suggest the prevalence of disability among (school) learners is in fact higher than what is currently observed among the university study student population – potentially considerably higher.
2. See the Higher Education student data collection for greater detail on these trends.
3. Identifying in two or more of the following categories: a non-English speaking or First Nations background, living in a regional disadvantaged area or socioeconomically disadvantaged area.