THE EFFECTS OF DEMAND DRIVEN UNIVERSITY ENTRY FOR FIRST NATIONS PEOPLE
I studied the effects of demand driven university entry in 2019 and the results of the policy announced today will be mixed
The Australian Government announced today that it will extend the demand driven university entry scheme currently available for First Nations people in regional and remote areas to apply to First Nations people across the country, including in capital cities. This announcement is a response to an interim report of the review of Australia’s higher education system led by Mary O’Kane.
A demand driven entry scheme means that any student that a university accepts as an undergraduate will receive Australian Government financial support. Between 2010 and 2017, Australia ran a demand driven entry scheme for undergraduate degrees for all Australian citizens and permanent residents. The policy saw the share of young people that attended university by age 22 years increase from 53% in 2010 to an estimated 60% in 2016, based on data from the Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth (LSAY).
I studied the 2010-17 scheme and measured the effects on university access, graduation and drop-out rates, as well as transition into the labour force. We identified those ‘additional students’ that entered university that would not have had the chance without the demand driven entry scheme and compared outcomes with ‘other students’ that would have entered university regardless.
Many of the additional students succeeded. About 68% of the additional students graduated by age 25 years (with some still studying), compared with 80% of other students. About 59% of those additional graduates entered managerial or professional occupations, an outcome that is similar to those of other graduates.
However, people that enter university with lower literacy and numeracy and a lower ATAR drop out at higher rates. By age 25 years, 22% of the additional students had left university without receiving a qualification compared with 12% of other students.
Source: Productivity Commission.
While most of the facts are in the infographic above, a few further comments are worth making.
HOW WELL DO THESE RESULTS APPLY TO FIRST NATIONS OUTCOMES AND THE POLICY ANNOUNCED TODAY?
A general caveat in applying the study’s results is that First Nations people were only a small share of the LSAY survey sample at age 15 and participation in follow-up surveys attrited substantially, so it was hard to make strong findings specific to the group. A further caveat is that this was a study of young people and many First Nations people enter university at older ages outside the scope of the study. Nevertheless, some of the broader findings of the study are relevant to the Australian Government’s policy announcement today.
First, while other students were disproportionately high achievers at school based on literacy and numeracy at age 15 years, additional students were about average among all school students. So there was a significant difference in academic preparedness when entering university.
DISTRIBUTION OF LITERACY AND NUMERACY AT AGE 15 YEARS
A score of 500 is the average across OECD countries in 2000
Source: Productivity Commission.
First Nations school students have signficantly lower school achievement than other ‘equity groups’ on average. The challenges for universities to manage lower academic preparedness in order to maintain high university completion rates and low drop-out rates under the 2010-17 scheme are likely to again appear for additional First Nations students entering university under the policy announced today.
LITERACY AND NUMERACY AT AGE 15 YEARS BY EQUITY GROUP
A score of 500 is the average across OECD countries in 2000
Source: Productivity Commission.
Second, few additional students entered the most selective universities, such as those that identify as part of the Group of Eight. Rather, a large majority of the additional students entered the least selective universities. The most selective universities grew their enrolments over the period by enrolling students that would have otherwise studied at less-selective universities.
PROPORTION OF UNDERGRADUATE ENROLMENTS BY AGE 22
Go8 is Group of Eight; ATN is Australian Technology Network; RUN is Regional Universities Network; IRU is Innovative Research Universities; Other is all other universities.
Source: Productivity Commission.
The policy announced today is slightly different because it only relates to First Nations people. The likely effect is that the most selective universities will increase their enrolment of First Nations students by admitting First Nations students that would have otherwise studied in less selective universities rather than people that would not have studied at university at all. The additional First Nations people that would otherwise not have entered university at all will generally enter less selective universities. My understanding is this is in line with the intent of the policy announced today.
SOME BROADER COMMENTS
Overall, the demand driven system operating between 2010 and 2017 succeeded in increasing the number of students and made progress in improving equity of access. However, many more entered university ill-prepared and struggled academically. The same outcomes are likely to be seen under the demand driven system for First Nations people announced today.
What changes would be complementary?
First, the school system needs to improve to deliver far better literacy and numeracy outcomes for all Australian students, but particularly for people from underprivileged groups including First Nations students. Literacy and numeracy at age 15 years is the single strongest predictor of participation in university education. This issue is the subject of a separate 1hand blog series underway (here and here).
Second, universities and schools should provide advice to all prospective students about the benefits and challenges of undergraduate study. University will not be the best option for many and students that drop out of university incur tuition fees (typically around $12 000 by the time they drop out) as well as opportunity costs of forgone employment. Reliable information that empowers prospective students to make choices are particularly important for young people growing up in suburbs with low university attainment, or where neither of their parents have attended university — some of whom will be First Nations people — because they are less likely to have close contacts with first-hand experience. Improvements in access to employment and vocational education and training as alternative options are just as important to ensure more young people succeed.
Third, universities need to do a better job of supporting students to give them the best chance to succeed, taking account of their diverse academic backgrounds and experiences prior to entry. While universities receive additional funding to support students from equity groups, the financial incentives for universities to provide effective support are far weaker than the financial incentives to merely enrol more students.
SUMMING UP
Overall, the policy announced today is a substantial and important public investment in improving outcomes for young First Nations people in major cities. It certainly has my support.
Nevertheless, the outcomes will be mixed.
A university education can be transformative and should be open to people regardless of their background. Most university students succeed academically and go on to rewarding careers. On average, they earn higher wages and are less likely to be unemployed, and they make the economy more innovative and adaptive. For students growing up in under-privileged backgrounds, a university education can provide particularly profound opportunities.
On the other hand, a substantial share of students that enter university with weak academic preparation will struggle and ultimately drop out, at a cost to themselves and to the public purse.
The benefits from opening access will be greatest if delivered with wrap-around services including better information and advice to empower prospective students to make choices in their own interest on whether to enrol, and appropriate support by the universities to commencing students to improve their prospects of academic success.