“Fish out of Water”: Students from Disadvantaged Schools and the University
Experience
Deb Tranter
Abstract
This paper draws on research undertaken as part of a doctoral thesis which uses a case study
approach to investigate the impact of school culture on the higher education aspirations of
secondary students in one of the most educationally disadvantaged regions in Australia, the
outer northern suburbs of Adelaide.
Bourdieu developed a theory of reproduction in education in which he used the concepts of
field, capital and habitus to explain how the environment in which people are raised, their
conditions of cultural and material existence, shape their attitudes, their means of interpreting
the world, and their capacities to engage with academic discourse (Bourdieu and Passeron,
1977). Using the voices of students who have enrolled at the University of South Australia
from the three schools in my case study, I am applying Bourdieu’s theoretical approach to
explore and analyse the ways in which student aspirations are shaped and to explain why
some students feel like “fish out of water” if and when they get to university.
I argue that it is the disjunction between the habitus of the students at the disadvantaged
schools and the higher education sector, particularly in some disciplines and campus
environments, which contributes to the low participation rates and level of discomfort for the
students who do enrol at university. It is important for universities to address this disjunction
if they are serious about increasing the successful participation of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds.
Introduction
This paper is based on the premise that higher education is a valuable opportunity that should
be equally accessible to all, no matter their socio-economic status. While I acknowledge that
university is not for everyone, I strongly believe that participation in higher education should
not be determined by who your parents are, where you live or what school you attend.
However, in reality, in Australia today we see a large disparity in higher education
participation, very much determined by where one lives and where one goes to school. For
example, recent research has shown that students in the affluent eastern suburbs of Adelaide
are up to 8 times more likely to attend university than students from the outer northern
suburbs, a region with the third lowest higher education participation rate in Australia
(Stevenson, McLachlan and Karmel, 1999).
The benefits of higher education to the individual have been well recorded in terms of
increased employment rates, higher average salaries, increased social status and overall
economic security (Anderson and Vervoorn, 1983; Johnson and King, 2000; Borland, 2002).
In addition, the overall benefit to Australia’s social fabric of increased participation in higher
education has been acknowledged by policy developers for some years (Dawkins, 1988,
NBEET/HEC, 1996, Nelson, 2002). Despite this, and a wide range of policy initiatives across
the higher education system, numerous studies have demonstrated that students from low
socio-economic backgrounds are far less likely to attend university than others (Anderson and
Vervoorn, 1983; William et al, 1993; James et al, 1999; DETYA, 1999). In order to
understand why this group of students has remained the most under-represented of all the
targeted equity groups in higher education (NBEET/HEC, 1996; Nelson, 2002), I have chosen
to undertake an in depth, qualitative investigation of the cultural ethos of a sample of schools
in low socio-economic areas.
1
When I am not studying I am employed by the University of South Australia with some
responsibility for attempting to increase access to the University for students who have
experienced educational disadvantage. In 1995 the University introduced a special entry
scheme targeting designated “disadvantaged” secondary schools with low rates of transition
to higher education. This scheme (USANET) aims to improve access to the University for
students from low socio-economic and rural/isolated backgrounds through a three-pronged
approach: by increasing familiarity with higher education, by the addition of bonus points to
tertiary entrance scores, and by providing a program of support for those students who enter
the University through the scheme.
Using a case study approach (Stake, 1994, Yin, 1991), I am undertaking an in-depth study of
the culture of three of the more disadvantaged metropolitan schools targeted by USANET,
and the aspirations and attitudes towards higher education of groups of students from these
schools. As part of this study I am looking for any influences the outreach and access
components of the USANET scheme may have had on the culture of the schools and the
perceptions and aspirations of the students. The case study approach allows concentrated
inquiry into the targeted schools, their students and their staff, facilitating an advanced
understanding of the culture of the schools (Stake 1994) and the importance of that culture on
the perceptions, attitudes and aspirations of their students.
My data is drawn from observations at the school, analyses of documents and statistics and a
series of semi-structured interviews with staff and students at the schools (students in year 12
and in year 10). I have also conducted semi-structured interviews with a small number of
students who have enrolled at the University of South Australia from the case study schools
(four from each of the three schools). In these interviews I asked students to reflect back on
their experiences at school and why they think it is unusual for students from their school to
gain entry to university. They were also asked to reflect on their experiences as students at the
University. The interviews with this group of students form the basis for this paper.
It is clear from the interviews to date that schemes like USANET hardly touch the surface in
influencing the attitudes and aspirations of secondary students in the more disadvantaged
schools. Such schemes appear to give hope to those students who are already interested in
university, and to increase their expectations of success, but for the vast majority of students
at these schools, university is an alien and inaccessible concept.
“I don't know about other schools, but, the first time that I heard anything about Uni,
when I was in year twelve, like, we hadn't had, like, information … in year twelve we
went for like an excursion, like to, not this Uni, but to like Adelaide Uni, and that's
the first time I had ever, ever, been to a Uni before in my life, I didn't ever know they
were here.”
(Male second year student)
Attending university is not part of the ethos of the schools and their student populations, not
part of what Pierre Bourdieu refers to as the habitus of the students, the pre-conscious, shared
set of acquired and embodied dispositions and understandings of the world developed through
objective structures and personal history (Bourdieu and Passeron, 1977; Harker, Maher and
Wilkes, 1990; Oakley and Pudsey, 1997). The schools have a pervading culture of academic
non-achievement and the minimal attempts of the universities to counter this through a variety
of special entry schemes appear to have had little influence on student aspirations. Students
only seem to become aware of the schemes as part of the application process, near the end of
year 12, and had very vague ideas about how they worked.
“Because I think that the USANET schemes for them, if they are determined to go, it’s
probably only helping them to get in. But if they don’t want to go I don’t think that
the scheme is going to make a difference to how they think.”
2
(Male second year student)
“… we were classed an underprivileged school. I think everybody knew that. But I
don’t think we all realised that we could get extra points for it though”.
(Female fourth year student)
Interestingly, students expressed a range of attitudes about the addition of bonus points; some
were understanding and appreciative of the practice while others, rejecting the concept of
“charity”, were uncomfortable with the thought that they might be “cheating” their way into
university. There appears to be a considerable amount of discussion amongst new university
students about their tertiary entrance (TER) scores and a number of my informants had been
quite embarrassed by the comparisons:
“I felt like I cheated my way in, not…not cheated but, like, benefits, you know what I
mean, like, cause I only got a TER of sixty and the course was sixty eight to start with,
and just felt that people, like, … I just thought they were feeling sorry for me so
they'd, like, make it easier for me, so, and like…
(Female first year student)
“…in a way I felt quite intimidated by some of the other students…because I found
out they had really high TERs. So I was just thinking that maybe I’m not cut out…like
maybe I wasn’t supposed to be here.”
(Male second year student)
This latter quote in particular expresses the sense of self-doubt and uncertainty which recurs
throughout the conversations I had with these students; the sense that perhaps they don’t
really belong at university, a sub-conscious recognition that their system of understanding,
their taken-for-granted way of being in the world, their habitus is somehow different and,
being different in this way, they are misfits in the University environment. For these people
their ‘illegitimacy’ as students, their sense that they didn’t really belong at University, was
sustained by the idea that they had got there by the subterfuge of bonus points.
On the other hand a number of students were pragmatic enough to acknowledge that without
the bonus points they might not have been able to gain access to university and that being
“smart” wasn’t necessarily enough.
And for me, if I didn’t get the extra points I wouldn’t be at uni now. Even just a
couple of extra points. Some of the people I know, they probably wouldn’t have got
it. They were just under or something. And having that extra points. And they are
really smart so they had an opportunity to go further because of it.
(Female fourth year student)
As a number of previous researchers have discussed (Connell et al, 1982, Anderson and
Vervoorn, 1983, Ramsay et al, 1998, Clarke, Zimmer and Main, 1999, James et al, 1999),
there is a huge complexity of reasons why students from low socio-economic backgrounds are
less likely to enter university. These range from family and community expectations, financial
hardship, attitudes to education, short-term rather than long-term goals, limited aspirations
and role models/mentors, low self-esteem, poor literacy skills and study skills, inadequate
academic preparation, the distraction of a critical mass of disengaged students in the
classroom and an unstable, often inexperienced and uncommitted teaching staff. I do not
contest the legitimacy of these explanations and indeed my informants tended to reinforce
their effects. However my focus in this paper is on how University is experienced by students
from low socio-economic backgrounds in order to increase understanding of the ways in
which these effects arise.
3
The schools I am studying are all located in communities where very few people have
attended university, where the habitus of the community is not shaped by this experience. In
most cases teachers are amongst the only people that the school students are likely to meet
who have any experience of higher education, hence the role of teachers in encouraging, or
discouraging, students is crucial. These schools are all defined by the Education Department
as “hard to staff” schools. They are avoided by many teachers and have to rely on a much
higher proportion of recent graduates and contract staff than is usual (Thompson, 2002).
Department policies severely limit the opportunities for schools to appoint teachers who
choose to and are committed to work there and when the opportunity for a “school choice”
position does become available, it is not uncommon for there to be only one applicant, or
none at all. Instead the schools, and the students, have to manage with a constant stream of
reluctant transferees and contract staff, many of whom are ill-equipped to cope. Not
surprisingly, there is a high level of staff turnover. The year 12 Chemistry class at one school
had five teachers last year, and the last one didn’t come back at the beginning of term four! A
year 10 English class I was visiting had four different “full-time” and a constant stream of
relief teachers. Of course, there are a number of accomplished, dedicated teachers at each
school I have visited, some of whom have specialised in teaching students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. I believe that these committed and highly skilled teachers, with
sufficient support structures behind them, are the key to lifting opportunities for the students
at the so-called “disadvantaged” schools, a position well supported in the research (Connell,
1982, Smyth et al, 2000, Thompson, 2002). Certainly all the students I interviewed at the
University talked about the importance of particular teachers in encouraging and supporting
them.
“My Chemistry teacher who I had for Maths as well, she was just fantastic…. I mean,
if you needed any extra help, she’d stay there with you until seven o’clock at night, to
make sure you got your work done and she’d be there for you at lunch and recess and
before school and gave us all her phone number.
(Female third year student)
“There were some teachers that were so helpful. In my year 12 I had this one
teacher. I wasn’t very good with my English because they didn’t teach me to write an
essay. They didn’t teach me how to make my writing flow. And she taught me how.
She gave me many opportunities to re-do my assignments. I did my assignments six
times in my English class so I could pass”.
(Female fourth year student)
“…and he was heaps of help with, like, our essays, because we didn’t do a lot of
essays at school, and when it came to doing all the essays for year 12 it was, oh, I
don’t know how to write an essay, so, and he’d go through it and go, ‘oh you need to
do this and you need to make sure these sentences make sense’ and, and you’d give
him a draft every week and he’d go through it again and yeah, he was really good…”
(Male second year student)
The struggle with academic writing discussed in two of the quotations above is continued in
the experiences students have at university.
“And that’s what I’ve been struggling through uni with, with writing my assignments.
I love the prac teaching and doing all the work with that, but struggling with the
writing aspect. It makes it hard….”
(Female fourth year student)
Bourdieu’s theory of reproduction in education uses the concepts of field, capital and habitus
in developing an explanation of how the environment in which students are raised, their
conditions of cultural and material existence, shape their attitudes, their means of interpreting
the world, and their capacities to engage with academic discourse (Bourdieu and Passeron,
1977). He states that “academic qualifications are to cultural capital what money is to
economic capital” (p 187), thus degrees become the “prize” in the “game” (Bourdieu’s field)
4
of higher education. The academic staff at universities control the dispersal of that capital (the
“prize”) as they see fit through the determination of “legitimate” knowledge and by ensuring
the reproduction of that knowledge through the allocation of grades (Oakley and Pudsey,
1997.) Continuing the metaphor of the game, in the field (game) of higher education the
understanding of how the game is played and how to win forms part of the habitus. The more
practice or experience one has with the game, the stronger the habitus, the more successful
one is likely to be. I am using Bourdieu’s theories to analyse what it is about the schools I am
studying that means their students are so much less likely than students at middle class
schools to complete year 12 and move on to university and how students from these schools
then struggle to know “how to play the game” when they do manage to get there.
A number of the students I interviewed talked about their sense of not fitting in, or belonging
at the University.
“Some of (the other students) were like, I’m so good, I can pay for it. They just seem
to know what they are doing and seem to be higher than everybody else. And it was
like some of them that you could tell that had the money and that’s why they can come
to uni. Whereas you haven’t got the name brand clothes or anything like that. It’s
like high school. Like coming back to high school again. Like for the first bit. I must
be in the wrong tutorial groups….
… we had to introduce each other. And I got one that just totally ignored me. She
just turned her back on me.… And she just totally ignored me. So I felt totally out of
place then. ”
(Female fourth year student)
“…in the first year I was still like, I felt, like an outsider all the time, and you can
spot like the groups of girls and guys that came from the same school, and that they
have known each other, and it's just, oh, I don’t know anyone here, like, cause it was
really only three people I knew, and one of my guy friends he, went to the levels, but
he was doing a subject here so I got to see him for five minutes on a Monday or
something, and it was like relief, I got to see someone I knew-…
…the way they talk, and the things they talk about, is like, things that I don’t know,
and things that I’ll probably never do, until, yeah, until I’m working…”
(Female third year student)
These quotations again illustrate the uncertainty the students feel about whether they really
belong at university, whether they know how to ‘play the game’. There is a clear recognition
of a hierarchy here, that some students ‘know the rules’, “they just seem to know what they
are doing and seem to be higher than everybody else” while my informants feel “out of
place”, “wrong”, “like an outsider all the time”. They understand that they haven’t really
learnt how to play the game, their sense of displacement is consistent with Bourdieu’s
conception of the way in which habitus works. “The way they talk and the things they talk
about”, the cultural and linguistic capital of those who ‘belong’, are seen as being from a
different world.
One particularly articulate young man, from possibly the most disadvantaged secondary
school in Adelaide, lost his eloquence as he struggled to explain his experiences to me:
“Yeah, and I actually found it hard to, when I first started going, to, well … to
actually talk to people, I felt like they were, I actually did feel like everyone was
smarter than what I was, I just had that feeling, and so I never really spoke out, like,
you know when you sit and you have a discussion, I kind of, just sat there, cause I
used to think in my head, … to think that if I had said something I would go away and
I would think, oh, I wonder if I sounded really stupid, like…
5
…and I, just, never wanted to be like, the leader of the group or speak or, cause I just,
it was really weird, cause I'm not like that, and … sometimes people would say things
and I was just like, oh, I have no idea what they mean…
…but as well, it was a shock because … I came back and didn't know the, like
processes of what people do, and I was like that, like, I could write essays but they
weren't like what we were meant to write…. Like, I never once, even in year twelve,
never had once referenced an essay.
…and they, like, the mature age students were like me, they're just thinking
referencing, what's that, whereas all the girls, because I had mostly girls in my social
work, all the girls just you know, like, these beautiful essays with, you know, foot
notes, and, I'm just like, oh, okay, what are references, and what, I hadn't even, I
didn't know how to use the library.
(Male second year student)
In his own way, this young man is clearly articulating experiences that align with Bourdieu’s
concepts of habitus and cultural capital; he didn’t know the “processes of what people do”,
how to play the game. He felt that he didn’t belong, experienced a strong sense of failure and
did in fact drop out of his first year at the university.
Interestingly, the quotations from the three students above were from students studying at the
University’s more middle class campus, located in Adelaide’s leafy green eastern suburbs.
When this young man changed program, from social work to nursing at another campus, he
immediately felt more comfortable, even though he had moved to a large inner-city campus,
the same campus that housed some of the University’s most elite programs.
Like I've come here this semester, like this semester, and I'm just normal, it's like I get
along with everyone, but, at (leafy green campus) I was just a different person, I was
so quiet and everyone used to call me the quiet one…
…and yet at (leafy green campus) I was so, I don't know if I was ashamed or
embarrassed to ask for help, and here I can just go to the library and say, like I, don't
know how to do this, and I don't feel embarrassed, but there I didn't ask for help on
anything, and that's probably why I was just like, lost, even when I couldn't find a
building, instead of asking someone where to go I just didn't go…
(Male second year student)
The culture of the campus at which a student is studying, its mix of disciplines and the
habitus of the students studying there appears to make a significant difference to the sense of
belonging for a student. Evans and Peel (1999) in their review of the transition to university
experience found that the transition experience varies according to the nature of the institution
and the discipline area concerned. In my early interviews I had been surprised that the
students had reported that they felt quite comfortable at university, after the first initial nerves
most people experience in a major new situation; but then I interviewed the three students
who enrolled at the leafy green campus described above! And this is the campus where most
of the teacher education programs are taught, and social work. As Evans and Peel point out,
the expectations and culture of particular disciplines, or fields, can vary enormously, as can
the environment of an institution, or campus. The students I interviewed who were studying at
the “Applied Sciences” campus, located in the northern suburbs of Adelaide and with a
concentration of science and technology-based programs, were much more comfortable than
those studying education and social work at the “Leafy Green” campus, as was the student
studying Nursing at the city. The experiences of the students at the “Leafy Green” campus
directly parallel those of the students at the University of Adelaide described by Copeland and
Hayford (1997) in their study into the experiences of students from low socio-economic
backgrounds at that “sandstone” institution.
6
You feel sometimes very isolated. I mean the only friends that I have…I don’t have
any friends from the private schools because they basically want nothing to do with
you. It’s mainly from public schools or people who are migrants from the same
background as me”. (p 5)
The public versus private school division is an additional factor which influences student
access to and performance at university but is a significant topic in itself which I will not
discuss here. However, even at the single campus, relatively homogenous University of
Adelaide Copeland and Hayford also found a clear distinction between different disciplines,
with low SES students enrolled in the more elite disciplines, such as law and medicine,
finding it the most difficult to fit in and ‘play the game’.
In my early analysis of the interviews with both students at the schools and those now
enrolled at the University the most important factor in achieving a place at university, and
persisting there, seems to be a very high level of inner motivation.
I found that I had a goal I wanted to achieve. I think a lot, cause they don’t know
what they want to do, that makes it really hard for them to continue.
…I suppose I had the determination to continue. I want to teach. I don’t want to take
the easy way out. I’m willing to take the challenges.
(Female fourth year student)
“Self motivation, I wanted to do well, and like, I seen people around me who, didn’t
do well, and I think if you're going to be there, you may as well work and do the best
you can, otherwise it's pointless going and, you can just go out and get a job, instead
of being at school, so I figured, make the best of it and do well, because I knew others
hadn’t done well, and I wanted to be better than them of course, cause I'm a
competitive person, and I always compare myself to other people.”
(Female first year student)
“I always wanted to go to university, it was never an option to not go-…I just never
had a thought of not doing it…”
(Female fourth year student)
One young woman organised herself to visit all three university open days, including one at
least 40 kilometres away on the opposite side of town, and talked to the advisers available for
the courses she was interested in, without any assistance from parents or the school. One
young man persisted through two years of both year 11 and year 12` (at least once because of
poor subject advice) and fathering two children to finally enrol in his chosen course.
These students appeared to have a much higher level of motivation than most middle class
students for whom family and school pressures support them through the uncertainties and
distractions of adolescence to achieve the expected goals of a satisfactory year 12 score and
higher education. For the vast majority of young adults struggling with these distractions
without the expectations of family, school and peers, it is not surprising that so few do make it
to university. It is only those with an extraordinary degree of motivation who persist, despite
the wide range of discouraging factors in their personal and school lives, their “dislocated
habitus” when at university (Oakley and Pudsey, 1997, p 7), and the stereotyping they all
have to bear, to a greater or lesser extent, because they come from a community which is
highly stigmatised.
“Because a lot of people think northern suburbs school, they’re not going to go to
university they’re just going to be on the dole or leave school at year 10, or
whatever…these sort of stereotypes affect the people that live there, they start to
believe that that is the way that they are and that’s all they can achieve.
7
…you always have the fear that people are going to say ‘oh which school did you go
to?’ and you’re going to say ‘Oh XXX and they’re just going to look at you and say
how the heck did you get here, what are you doing here?’ sort of thing….”
(Female fourth year student)
“…like when we introduced ourselves I said I was from XXX, and people were like
laughing at us…yeah a few of my mates they always give me, like pay me out a bit,
but I know it’s a pretty bad spot. Some people are bad and some people aint. You
know, give them a chance, they’re not as bad down there.”
(Male first year student)
These students all travel long distances each day to attend university, further exacerbating
their sense that they don’t really belong. All but one student was still living in the northern
suburbs, even those who had moved from their family home, a number admitting that they
feel more ‘at home’, more comfortable living in the community in which they grew up. Most
expressed a commitment to working back in their communities when they graduate, while
acknowledging that they now do not quite belong to their old world:
“I see friends like, that I haven’t seen for ages and they go, ‘oh what do you do now?’ ‘Oh I
go to uni.’ ‘Are ya?’ I go yeah, and like oh, and it’s sort of like, oh, well I’m not talking to you
now. … I don’t know, I feel weird like, and they don’t understand … ‘what do you want to be
a teacher for?’ ”
(Female third year student)
These students have reached the stage where their experience at university has moved them
away from the habitus within which they grew up but they haven’t yet acquired the
dispositions and cultural capital, the habitus, to make them feel ‘at home’ within the field of
the university.
Conclusion
In my discussion of their experiences at university I have attempted to highlight the hurdles
these students encounter in moving from a habitus of the working (or increasingly nonworking) class to the habitus of the university. Even a university such as the University of
South Australia, which has made considerable efforts to increase access for people from low
socio-economic backgrounds, is still a site of reproduction of the dominant classes, where the
academics shape and control the cultural and linguistic capital which is part of the habitus of
the middle classes but which is alien to my informants. In order to counter the “dislocated
habitus” discussed by Oakley and Pudsey (1997, p7) and succeed at university the students
appear to need an extraordinary degree of self-motivation, a level of motivation far above that
held by most of their fellow class mates at school but also, I would suggest, above most of
their middle class fellow students at university.
For secondary students from low socio-economic backgrounds, special entry schemes like
USANET have helped some of the most motivated gain access to university. Nevertheless,
there is still a long way to go for such schemes to have any significant effect on the
proportion of these students who are admitted to university. No matter how much effort the
university sector places on broadening access, however, there can be little benefit unless the
universities consider what happens when these students do leap the many hurdles and actually
enrol. Recognition that students come from a wide diversity of backgrounds is increasingly
important for all universities, especially in a multicultural Australia where the commitment to
diversity is seen as fundamental to ongoing growth. Socio-economic status, or social class,
should be considered in the same way as ethnicity, age or gender and universities must work
towards as inclusive an environment as possible. This has implications for curriculum,
teaching methodologies and support structures. It is important for universities and their staff
to acknowledge and question the predispositions and ‘taken-for-granted’ expectations of the
8
university, to understand how university can be an alienating environment for many
undergraduates, and to take steps to address this alienation. In the same way, universities need
to acknowledge and value the lived experiences of the diversity of the student body through
student-centred curriculum, teaching methodologies and support structures. In this way,
students from all backgrounds are more likely to feel like fish swimming in, rather than out
of, water.
References
Anderson, DS and Vervoorn, AE 1983, Access to Privilege: Patterns of Participation in
Australian Post-Secondary Education, ANU Press, Canberra.
Borland, J 2002, New Estimates of the Private Rate of Return to University Education in
Australia, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of
Melbourne, Melbourne, p 32.
Bourdieu, P. and Passeron, J.C. 1977, Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture,
London, Sage
Clarke, J., Zimmer, B. and Main, R. 1999, ‘Review of the under-representation in Australian
higher education by the socio-economically disadvantaged and the implications for university
planning’, Journal of Institutional Research in Australasia, Vol. 8, No.1, pp 36-55
Connell, R.W., Ashenden, D.J., Kessler S., and Dowsett G.W. 1982, Making the Difference:
Schools, Families and Social Division, Allen and Unwin
Dawkins, J.S.1988, Higher Education: A Policy Statement, Canberra: AGPS.
Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Higher Education Division 1999,
Equity in Higher Education, Canberra
Dobson, I, Sharma, R and Ramsay, E, 1998 Designated Equity Groups in Australian
Universities: Performance of 1996 Commencing Students in Undergraduate Award Courses,
Australian Vice Chancellors’ Committee
Copeland, J. and Hayford J. 1997 “Perceptions and Experiences of the University of Adelaide
by Students from Low Socio-economic Backgrounds” (unpublished report)
Evans, M. & Peel, M. 1999 “Factors and Problems in School to University Transition” in
Transition from Secondary to Tertiary Performance Study Higher Education Series, DEST
James R, Wyn J, Baldwin G, Hepworth G, McInnes C and Stephanson A, 1999 Rural and
Isolated School Students and their Higher Education Choices, NBEET, AGPS, Canberra
Johnson, P. and King, A. 2000, “Intergenerational Effects of Long term Unemployment:
Scoping Study”, NATSEM report prepared for DETYA, Canberra
Kemp D, 2001 Higher Education Report for the 2001 to 2003 triennium. DETYA, Canberra,
pp 78-81
Harker, R., Mahar, C., and Wilkes, C., 1990, An Introduction to the Work of Pierre Bourdieu:
The Practice of Theory, Macmillan
9
Mark, G., Fleming, N., Long, M. and McMillan, J. 2000, Patterns of Participation in Year 12
and Higher Education in Australia: Trends and Issues LSAY Research Report No. 17, ACER
McInnes, C., James, R. and McNaught, C. 1995, First Year on Campus, Canberra: AGPS.
NBEET/HEC 1996 Equality, Diversity and Excellence: Advancing the National Equity
Framework, AGPS, Canberra
Nelson B, (2002) Higher Education at the Crossroads: An Overview Paper, DEST, Canberra
Oakley S, & Pudsey, J. 1997 “Symbolic Practices of Academe: the paradox of culture and
knowledge” Access and Equity Special Projects Report, Flinders University of South
Australia
Pargetter, R. J., McInnis, C., James, R., Evans, M., Peel, M., Dobson, I.R. 1999, Transition
from Secondary to Tertiary: A Performance Study, DETYA Higher Education Service, Report
36, Canberra
Ramsay E, Tranter D, Charlton C & Sumner R, 1998 Higher Education Access and Equity for
Low SES School Leavers, A Case Study. EIP, DETYA, Canberra
Skuja E, 1997 ‘Performance of the Australian university sector in access and equity’ in Postle
G.D, Clarke JR, Skuja E, Bull DD, Batorowicz, K and McCann, HA (eds) Towards
Excellence in Diversity: Educational Equity in the Australian Higher Education Sector in
1995: Status, Trends and Future Directions, Toowoomba: University of Southern Queensland
Press
Smyth, J., Hattam, R., Cannon, J., Edwards, J., Wilson, N., Wurst, S. 2000, Listen to me I’m
Leaving: Early School Leaving in South Australian Secondary Schools, Adelaide, Flinders
Institute for the Study of Teaching
Stake, R. E. 1994, ‘Case Studies’ in Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry edited by N Denzin and
Y Lincoln Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp 86-109
Stevenson, S., Maclachlan, M, and Karmel, T. 1999, Regional Participation in Higher
Education and the Distribution of Higher Education Resources across Regions, Occasional
Paper Series, Higher Education Division, DETYA
Tranter, D.R. 1998, ‘University Access for School Leavers from Low SES Backgrounds: A
Case Study’ Paper presented at the Third National Conference on Equity and Access in
Tertiary Education, Yepoon, September
Thompson, P. 2002, Schooling the Rust Belt Kids: Making the Difference in Changing Times,
Allen and Unwin
Williams, T., Long, M., Carpenter, P. and Hayden, M. 1993, Entering Higher Education in
the 1980s, Canberra: AGPS.
Yin, R.K. 1991, Case Study Research: Design and Methods Newbury Park, Sage Publications
10