The Determinant Factors of Academic Performance of University Students in Ecuador. A Multilevel Longitudinal Study

Equity in higher education is mostly related to the context in which it is discussed. Most commonly, equity is sought for enhancing access to higher education for under-represented groups such as minorities, low income groups, or any other type of disadvantaged group of people. The plethora of research in this area mostly focuses on different types of affirmative action aiming to enroll more under-represented groups in higher education, whereas in the research on equity, within the context of educational outcomes and quality, the interaction between equity and quality in higher education is scarce. This paper discusses the entangled issues of equity and quality in higher education and explores the possible solutions to promoting both. It concludes that admission models aiming to achieve equity in higher education should be more outcomes-based (e.g., increase success) rather than process-based (e.g., increase participation).

The history of women's engagement with the academy has been characterised by exclusion and inequality. Seven decades ago, Virginia Woolf1 asked: Do we want to join the procession or don't we? On wh...

Digital equity, grounded in principles of equity and the ethics of care, is essential for ensuring quality higher education. It facilitates access, supports sustainability, and promotes inclusive education by addressing the technological dimensions of education. This study explores the relationship between digital equity and sustainability in higher education. A total of 167 students enrolled in initial teacher education programs at the University of Primorska, Faculty of Education, completed a questionnaire featuring the Digital Equity in Higher Education Scale and the Sustainability in Higher Education Scale. To achieve this study’s objectives, a principal factor analysis was conducted to validate the scales, and a multiple linear regression was employed to develop a predictive model. The findings revealed that digital equity in higher education comprises five dimensions as follows: (i) access to teachers who support the use of digital technology; (ii) access to digital technology and opportunities for its use; (iii) access to digital resources; (iv) access to culturally relevant software and applications; and (v) access to open-access resources. Sustainability in higher education encompasses two dimensions as follows: (i) collaborative problem solving and (ii) socioemotional aspects of sustainability. These dimensions interact in a complex manner. Key predictors of digital equity and sustainability included access to and use of digital technology, as well as collaborative problem solving. Importantly, this study highlighted the critical role of skilled teachers in facilitating the effective use of digital technology.

A Dual admission model for equity in higher education: a multi-cohort longitudinal study

Chapter 8 - Access and Equity in Higher Education in Indonesia: A Review from the Periphery

One of the most important strategies of promoting higher education adopted in the recent years has been the promotion of private sector participation in higher education. It is argued by some that private higher education would improve equity, access and quality in higher education. But it shown here drawing from Indian and global experience that (a) public higher education has the greatest potential to address the issue of equity in higher education; (b) charity and philanthropy-based private sector may also have high potential in addressing this issue; (c) state-supported and effectively regulated private sector can address the issue to some extent; and (d) the private higher education sector based on the market principles can actually work against the principles and goals of access, equity and excellence in higher education.

The increasing participation rate in higher education has raised its own issues, such as how to fund the growth while retaining the quality of education. In Finland, it has been argued that the tuition-free higher education policy increases equality. On the other hand, in the United Kingdom, establishing a system of tuition fees supported by an income-contingent loan system for students has also been argued to increase equality. In Australia, students also face high tuition fees for higher education, as well as a support system focused on domestic students. In addition to tuition fees, entrance examinations also play a crucial part in higher education systems. In order to examine inequalities in higher education from the students’ point of view, tuition fees are scrutinised in connection with equality, and entrance examinations in relation to cultural reproduction. Comparing examples of higher music education institutions in Finland, the United Kingdom, and Australia shows that there are large differences between the tuition fees charged for domestic and international students, as well as between countries. Entrance examinations in higher music education are similar in these countries, but may include inequalities based on long traditions in the field of music, especially in classical music. By revealing misconceptions about equity in higher education, it is possible to have a critical debate about the role of tuition fee systems as they are connected with the economics of higher education, and about entrance examinations as reproducing social class inequalities. This discussion may contribute to the redefinition and reformation of more equitable and just education systems, and promote equality in general in society.

This paper examines several research questions relating to equality and equity in Chinese higher education via an extended literature review, which in turn sheds light on evolving scholarly explorations into this theme. First, in the post-massification era, has the Chinese situation of equality and equity in higher education improved or deteriorated since the late 1990s? Second, what are the core issues with respect to equality and equity in Chinese higher education? Third, how have those core issues evolved or changed over time and what does the evolution indicate and entail? Methodologically, this paper uses a bibliometric analysis to detect the topical hotspots in scholarly literature and their changes over time. The study then investigates each of those topical terrains against their temporal contexts in order to gain insights into the core issues.

The higher education (HE) equity and social justice agenda is primarily concerned with inequalities in the participation of underrepresented groups. The main purpose of this agenda is to widen access to the social privileges that HE offers. Transnational policy agencies and national governments have advised higher education institutions (HEIs) to deploy relevant indicators and implement inclusive practices, such as financial assistance, nondiscriminatory admission mechanisms, and student guidance and counseling. HEIs have also been funded to provide outreach and widening participation programs in several countries. In the early 21st century, the conceptualization of HE equity and justice has broadened from fair access to more holistic, procedural, and intersectional approaches. Still, the lack of reliable, relevant, and feasible policy indicators and data make it a challenging objective to measure and follow up. Furthermore, research has pointed out the need for contextualized definitions of equity and justice because the specific social and cultural challenges differ from one country to another. Equity and justice manifest themselves in the broader design of national and regional HE systems. Some HE systems have stronger institutional stratification and financial barriers than others, hence restraining the fairness of access and social inclusion. The application of Pierre Bourdieu’s sociological theory has dominated much of the research on structural constraints of HE equity and justice. An understanding of the connection between structure/agency and the cultural reproduction opens up new avenues for the development of HE equity and justice in both policy and practice.

Higher education spaces are embedded within the larger ecosystem of societies, and they simultaneously endorse, question, critique, and transform societal norms. Exploring gender equity in higher education curriculum and pedagogy involves examining the systemic, social, and cultural dynamics that influence gender disparities within academic spaces and society. Examining gender mainstreaming in higher education pedagogy is essential to address systemic biases, promote inclusive teaching practices, and ensure that all students, regardless of gender, have equal opportunities to succeed. A co-constructed comparative case study of Kazakhstan and India provides a unique lens to understand these disparities and devise strategies to address them. In this study, we analyzed data collected from two universities to understand the challenges and curriculum and pedagogic practices that can create more equitable spaces. By adopting a collaborative research approach, this comparative study reveals common challenges, successful strategies, and practices that can help create gender equity and inclusivity in higher education. Findings indicate that while gender awareness and sensitivity are in the minds of the stakeholders, they are not embedded in the curriculum. Data analysis further demonstrates the need to incorporate more representative voices from different genders across the curriculum, both as textual material and as more diverse faculty. We argue that deep-rooted patriarchal norms and systemic barriers that continue to hinder gender inclusivity can be addressed not by creating specific courses or programs but by a holistic, inclusive curriculum that embeds gender equity in every aspect of higher education.

Reviewed by: Allies for Inclusion: Disability and Equity in Higher Education: ASHE Volume 39, Number 5 by Karen A. Myers, Jaci Jenkins Lindburg, & Danielle M. Nied Edlyn Vallejo Peña Karen A. Myers, Jaci Jenkins Lindburg, & Danielle M. Nied. Allies for Inclusion: Disability and Equity in Higher Education: ASHE Volume 39, Number 5. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2014. 152pp. Paperback: $29.00. ISBN: 978-1-118-84611-7 Today, 11% of college students report having a disability (U.S. Department of Education, 2009). Federal legal mandates, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, coupled with growing enrollments of students with disabilities, have increasingly prompted postsecondary institutions to serve the unique and complex needs of their students over the past 25 years. In their monograph, Allies for Inclusion: Disability and Equity in Higher Education, Myers, Lindburg, and Nied (2014) bring attention to the ways in which institutional allies can support the needs and successes of college students with disabilities. The monograph is useful “to serve as a guide to promote the inclusion of people with disabilities” (p. 5) for researchers and higher education practitioners. The seven-chapter monograph departs from the majority of publications about students with disabilities in higher education. That is, the central purpose of Allies for Inclusion is to underscore and explore the role of faculty, staff, and administrators as allies in the lives of students with disabilities. The authors move a step beyond placing the onus of responsibility for postsecondary success on students with disabilities and disability service providers themselves toward a shared model of campus ownership and responsiveness toward students. The authors begin their first chapter with a discussion on preparing institutions of higher [End Page 310] education for a future of equity and inclusion for students with disabilities. It effectively establishes the significant role of allies and argues that the inclusion of people with disabilities is the responsibility of all campus constituents, not just those who work in disability and affirmative action offices. This theme of shared responsibility is woven into the fabric of the rest of the chapters. The second chapter details an overview of disability history in higher education. The authors describe critical pieces of legislation, policies, and cases that made an impact on disability movements in society, and in turn, institutions of colleges and universities. The unfolding descriptions of key decisions made in the United States capture the “spirit of change” over the last 60 years for students with disabilities. The authors describe different types of disabilities in the third chapter, with the majority of college students having been diagnosed with a learning disability or ADD/ADHD. Meanwhile, autism spectrum disorders and psychological disabilities are on the rise. The chapter summarizes research studies that report students’ experiences with faculty, disability services, and navigating campus cultures. The authors remind their readers that the whole campus is responsible for cultivating an inclusive climate. “Disability education is for everyone, by everyone. Through collaborative efforts and open communication, an entire campus community has the potential for providing a welcoming, inclusive environment” (p. 47). The next chapter focuses on “Understanding Campus Complexities: Problems, Challenges, and Marginalization.” The authors detail different theoretical lenses through which people with disabilities are viewed and treated, not just in society but in higher education. The models range from perpetuating damaging perceptions toward people with disabilities to a framework rooted in social justice. These models and frameworks include the moral model, the medical model, the functional limitations framework, the minority group paradigm, the social construction model, and the social justice perspective. Ultimately, the goal is to move toward a lens that “challenges those [traditional] assumptions, celebrating the uniqueness of individual differences while focusing on social change and transforming oppressive structures” (p. 53). The chapter also delves into attitudes about disability, as well as campus services, including serving veterans with disabilities. While the topics in the fourth chapter provide practitioners and researchers with critical information about ways in which to frame and serve students with disabilities, the major drawback of the monograph reveals itself in this very chapter, alerting the readers to a limitation that is systemic to the monograph. That is, Myers, Lindburg, and Nied fail to explain the ways in...

This dissertation examines the barriers to gender equity in higher education in Papua New Guinea (PNG). It highlights the critical role higher education potentially might play in equitable human resource development, pointing towards a sustainable and strategic plan to reduce gender inequities. This study is motivated by imperatives at three levels: personal, national and international. At the personal level, drawing on the advice of feminist thought which recognises that the personal is political, several women’s stories set a frame that locates the candidate as a participant and a person interested in pursuing equity in higher education in PNG. The literature review provides the national and international contexts that frame this dissertation within these equity imperatives. Importantly, this dissertation locates itself in PNG’s matrilineal and patrilineal societies, acknowledging the potential contribution of these lifestyles in the hope of adopting positive cultural values from both societies towards proposing sustainable and equitable gender strategies. The dissertation employs gender and feminist theory in order to embrace a relevant theoretical and conceptual framework to determine feasible and sustainable strategies and conceptual frameworks in analysing the research problem, the research questions, the research methodology and the thesis genre. The three adopted conceptual frameworks are: a Gender Inclusive Curriculum, a Cultural Competence and a Strength Based Framework. These frameworks reinforce the need for multimethod approaches in seeking answers to the research questions. The study utilises a survey and document analysis methodology, with two universities selected for intensive investigation. Surveys were administered to samples of university lecturers, administrators and students, along with a content analysis of relevant policies and documents. The responses revealed the types of barriers encountered and sought understanding of gender equity policies, practices and inclusive curriculum. The research revealed a range of gender barriers that can be classified as social, economic, cultural, educational and political. This reinforced what was predicted from the literature review. The striking finding of this study was the underlying factor causing the gender inequities, that is, the existence of pervasive, deeply entrenched cultural beliefs held by decision-makers and those in authority that positioned women as secondary, which marginalised and consequently impeded the progress of women. The findings also revealed that the staff, students and the wider community lacked understanding of the concepts of gender equity and inclusive curriculum. The study identified the need for positive action for gender equity policies to be administered. The main recommendations of this study outline strategic and sustainable plans for a national long term Gender Equity in Education Policy Implementation and Sustainable Strategic Plan 2008-2020 and a Long Term Strategic Plan for Women in Higher Education 2008-2020 Strategic Plan. These initiatives are recommended for inauguration at the national legislative level where they have the potential to be better resourced and managed. It is anticipated that after having established a national equity office as proposed by these two strategic plans, a role-model centre be established that will filter through to the regional, provincial and local institutions. This dissertation is significant because it is the first of its kind in PNG, and it is aimed firmly at better understanding the reasons for gender inequity in higher education and importantly, in providing proactive strategic plans to address these factors. It has the potential to lead the way to a significant cultural shift in the higher education context of PNG.

Social equity in higher education has been a priority for universities and policy makers throughout Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) nations for more than a decade. Limited improvement is seen among students in under-represented groups which remains a concern and for this reason social equity in higher education is presented as a wicked problem. This article will outline the steady massification of higher education where elitist discourses were largely abandoned, while social equity discourses flourished. The discussion will include key documents that have wielded great influence on discourse including The Bradley Review, Performance-Based Funding (PBF) and the Job-Ready Graduates legislation. After illuminating the Australian political context, this article will define four social equity discourses currently distinguishable in higher education literature: meritocratic, economist, social justice and human potential. Interrogation of these discourses will reveal complexity and divergence that contributes to the wicked nature of improving social equity in higher education.

Objective: This study explores how the ideas of meritocracy are reflected in the government officials’ financial investment in higher education in China, and how this relates to education equity. Methods: Given the important position of higher education in the occupational ladder and social structure, and the fact that higher education and diplomas have become one of the main criteria for promoting educational officials, this study uses meritocracy as the theoretical framework to conduct an analysis regarding the educational backgrounds of members of the leadership teams of the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Finance, and various provincial government departments of education and finance in the People’s Republic of China. It adopts content analysis as a method, which can quantitatively analyze the proportion of official education composition and qualitatively reveal the potential meaning of the proportion. Results: Findings show that merits have been internalized into value pursuits in various fields of society, especially in the promotion of officials and the education ecosystem that this study focuses on, which impedes education equity in Chinese higher education. Conclusion: Nowadays, universities are no longer lofty ivory towers. Their pursuit of rankings, reputation, and performance has its urgency and rationality. However, excessive attention to achievements and efficiency will vacillate the traditional academic, cultural, and educational nature of universities, making their essence increasingly numerous and jumbled. The pursuit of merit should be directed towards a more noble destination to cultivate new generations with ontology and self-consciousness for the realization of educational utopia. The role of governments at all levels should not be as stakeholders, performance reviewers, or spectators from afar, but as supporters, contributors, and leaders in rebuilding a fair, pure, and united education ecosystem.

This chapter investigates the importance of social variety in institutional frameworks, notably in higher education, in response to the urgent societal concerns of the twenty-first century. The goal is to foster an educational environment that values, respects, and includes all students, regardless of gender, race, or socioeconomic status. The main goal is to foster an environment in which students feel both academically engaged and empowered to reach their greatest potential. This involves an equitable and inclusive teaching strategy that recognizes student's different experiences, needs, and objectives, as well as collaborative efforts from all educational partners. The goal of this research is to investigate and propose solutions to improve equity in higher education, with the ultimate goal of creating educational settings that accommodate students; with different needs. The objectives include identifying critical areas for change in present educational practices, investigating the influence of inclusive teaching methods on student success, and recommending concrete ways for institutions to implement them. The methodology used in this study is a thorough evaluation of the existing literature on diversity, equity, and inclusion in higher education. It also includes case studies and examples of how inclusive approaches have been successfully implemented in diverse educational contexts. The theoretical framework is based on social justice theories, emphasizing the significance of providing equal opportunity for all individuals in the educational system. To achieve inclusion and equity, a comprehensive approach is advocated. Strategies such as accessibility and equity initiatives, flexible and adaptable teaching methods, active student engagement, inclusive communication, diverse representation in faculty and staff, diversity training programs, fair assessment practices, and transparent admissions policies are critical. Furthermore, financial support mechanisms, mentorship and tutoring programs, diversity-sensitive orientation campaigns, and the creation of inclusive courses and programs all help to build an equal educational environment. Faculty training has been acknowledged as a critical component in ensuring that educators have the skills and understanding required to effectively implement inclusive teaching techniques. Emotional support services and accessible physical infrastructure are also critical components in meeting the different needs of students. Finally, this study calls for a comprehensive and collaborative strategy to create equitable educational settings in higher education. By implementing the recommended measures, institutions can demonstrate their commitment to promoting diversity, fairness, and social justice, thereby helping students prepare for the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century.