higher education

Image in header is Dr Mitchell Rom and Dr Hayley Williams (both pictured in the middle), together with graduating students at The University of Queensland’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Sashing Ceremony. The author has been given permission to use this image.

Completion: Deadly tips for students who have just finished a PhD

higher education, Indigenous education, , , , ,

This is the third and final article in the series. In the first article, I discussed tips for students who are considering undertaking a PhD in Education. Following this, I outlined some potentially useful tips for students who are currently navigating the program. This final article offers some advice for students who have just finished a PhD. 

First, I offer my congratulations to you on submitting your thesis, completing your oral component (if required) and receiving conferral of the degree. You have achieved a significant milestone and you should be proud of this achievement. As an Indigenous PhD graduate, you are not only shifting historical, racialised discourse, but also challenging coloniality in education. While you are among a growing number of Indigenous PhD graduates in Australia, there is still more progress to be made given there were only 52 Indigenous PhD graduates in 2021 (Universities Australia, 2023). This equates to there being fewer than two Indigenous PhD graduates per university within Australia (Universities Australia, 2023).

This number has been fairly consistent since 2016. Prior to this, there were only 25 Indigenous PhD graduates in Australia in 2015 – or less than one graduate per university (Universities Australia, 2023). Within a postgraduate research context, to reach population parity of 3.2 per cent, the university sector would have needed to graduate an additional 115 Indigenous postgraduate research students in 2021 (Universities Australia, 2023).

Academia in Australia is a Westernised space where Indigenous knowledges, theories, methodologies and methods sit on the margins of the university. If you have contributed to either the Indigenous education or studies space, thank you for your contribution. You may now be wondering “what do I do with a PhD?” Below are some potentially useful tips that may help with your transition into the next phase of your career.

Celebrate this milestone with those who celebrate you

Before we explore potential employment opportunities, I encourage you to attend your graduation ceremonies. More specifically, I encourage you to attend your Indigenous graduation ceremony, your School’s event, as well as your broader university graduation ceremony. These graduation events not only provide you the opportunity to recognise and celebrate your achievement, but they also provide those who have supported you with the opportunity to celebrate this milestone with you. One of the highlights of my PhD program was attending the UQ Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Sashing Ceremony and being invited to deliver the graduation address. This was a special event as it was attended by my mum and aunty (two proud Quandamooka women), together with my then-fiancé and one of my supervisors. The message here is simple – capture and celebrate these special moments with your loved ones and your advisory team. You deserve this moment!

Publish your research findings (if you haven’t already done so)  

It is a good idea to think about publishing your main research findings or various chapters of your thesis if you have not already commenced this writing and publishing process. Although you may be fed up with writing at this point, publishing your work in peer-reviewed journals will strengthen your employment opportunities. I recommended that you discuss the journal selection process with your supervisors, ideally before you graduate. Your work in education deserves to be read and engaged with in quality journals (Q1/Q2). I also recommended using the useful online tool, ScImago Journal & Country Rank, to search for potential journals in Education and to view their details and ranking.

Explore your work opportunities: You have more agency than you may think

Your expertise has value across society and many fields so I encourage you to broaden your horizon and search for potential work in various areas of employment. You have more agency and choice than you may think and you can make a positive contribution to your space outside of academia. With a PhD in Education, you have the privilege and opportunity to consider employment in schools, academia, industry/organisations or government. Consultancy work might also be a viable option. There are many organisations outside of academia who value Indigenous education such as the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership or the Stronger Smarter Institute. You could search for potential employment opportunities with The Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies. You may also want to become involved with a national charity, such as the Australian Literacy & Numeracy Foundation, if you are interested or trained in these areas.

If you are interested in transitioning into academia and research (for example a Postdoctoral Research Fellow), I recommended you discuss potential opportunities with your advisory team and School. Furthermore, reconnect with those academics who have supported you during your candidature to discuss potential employment opportunities. I encourage you to search for work opportunities and workplaces that suit you and align with your career interests. Applications, especially in an academic context, are also usually lengthy so remember to prioritise your wellbeing throughout the employment process.

Extra tip for Schools and Universities:

Consider offering PhD graduates the opportunity to provide feedback (preferably formal) on the program

I find it interesting that there is not an option for recent PhD graduates to provide feedback on the program – despite all other university students being asked to provide course feedback upon course completion. In my view, allowing recent graduates with an opportunity to provide formal feedback with regards to different aspects of the PhD program (for example in relation to candidature, milestones, postgraduate conferences, events, supervision, submission, the Graduate School, examination, graduation), may be beneficial to Schools. It could seek to further strengthen the existing PhD program by embedding evidence-based changes that aim to support future, as well as current, Indigenous and non-Indigenous students, thereby working to improve overall completion numbers.

Dr Mitchell Rom is a Lecturer with the Institute for Positive Psychology and Education at Australian Catholic University. Mitchell initially trained as a secondary teacher in the disciplines of English and History and holds a PhD in Indigenous education. His research interests include Education, Equity and Decoloniality. His research has attracted national awards including the Australian Association for Research in Education Betty Watts Indigenous Researcher Award. As a Nunukul/Ngugi researcher, Mitchell has also taught in initial teacher education and has worked across various levels of education. Contact him on LinkedIn.

Image in header are students at the Weemala Indigenous Student Success Unit at Australian Catholic University, Brisbane campus. The author has been given permission to use this image.

Progress and Persistence: Deadly tips for students who are navigating a PhD

higher education, Indigenous education, , , , ,

This is the second article in the series.  In the first article, I discussed tips for students who are considering undertaking a PhD in Education. This second article discusses some useful tips for Indigenous students who are currently navigating the program. The issue of Indigenous student retention in PhD programs is important because while Universities Australia (2023) report a steady growth in Indigenous postgraduate research enrolments from 2005 to 2021, Indigenous student award completions still remain relatively low (Universities Australia, 2023).

This article unpacks a number of tips for those students who are currently navigating the PhD program and working towards confirmation of candidature, mid-candidature review or final thesis review. Some of these tips may also be beneficial to supervisors and may seek to support student retention.

Be open to shifts in your initial research topic or research questions

As you continue to engage with contemporary literature and yarn with your supervisors and experts in your field, you may notice that your initial research topic, scope of your study or research questions begin to shift. From my experience, this is a fairly natural progression of research. These sorts of research developments are sometimes necessary and can ultimately improve your thesis. Try not to be discouraged if this is the case for you in the early stages of your candidature. Embrace these research shifts as these developments may actually strengthen your research study.

Participate in campus events/activities and engage with groups

Feeling both academically and culturally supported is key with regards to candidature, particularly during the early stages. To feel a sense of support, I recommend participating in various campus events and activities. Within the early stages of my research, I was invited by my supervisor to share my PhD idea to fellow Indigenous academics and PhD students during a 3-minute thesis competition that was based on campus. These events are a great opportunity to gain experience with regards to public speaking, which will also assist you in your preparation for confirmation of candidature. They are also an opportunity to network with fellow students and researchers. Reach out to your advisory team to find out if there are any upcoming campus events or activities that may be of interest to you.

Additionally, I encourage you to consider potentially joining a reading group at university. This group might be based either within or outside of your School. Joining a reading group is a deadly way to familiarise yourself with current literature in Education/Indigenous education or within Indigenous studies. During my candidature, I was involved in two reading and yarning groups with fellow Indigenous students and academics and I felt supported and valued in both of these groups. There may also be opportunities to collaborate and publish within these groups which will also benefit your future employment opportunities.

Navigate problematic research data with support from trusted people

If you are undertaking research in the political space of Indigenous education, there is a possibility that you may need to engage with problematic research data. Essentially, I am referring to racist or resistant educational data that you may have gathered during data collection. This type of data has the potential to be triggering. If this is the case, then you may want to consider having a yarn in relation to this matter with trusted people including your family members, trusted colleagues/critical friends or your advisory team. An additional option may be to explore counselling services at university (or outside of university) for your wellbeing.  

With my research, I had to engage with colonising data and racist language on a regular basis for a lengthy period of time. I had to navigate explicitly and implicitly resistant research data by a number of non-Indigenous students in relation to studying compulsory Indigenous education at university. While I acknowledge and understand that this data was mostly by non-Indigenous pre-service teachers who were inexperienced, as an Indigenous researcher, I was still subjected to this data. I attempted to balance out this experience with reading positive student data and remembering that one of the goals of my research was to disrupt coloniality. Upon reflection, this issue was perhaps one of my most difficult challenges in the program. I note that my wife was my main support during data collection and analysis and it is important for you to have similar support to navigate these types of challenges.

Be open to feedback on your research (but perhaps not too open)

I encourage you to enjoy this learning journey and to listen to those scholars who are experts in your field. In my experience,  academia is grounded in informal and formal feedback. Try to be open to feedback on your research from your advisory team and from trusted colleagues/critical friends and students. While this tip may sound simple, it is often more challenging in practice. However, I do believe that receiving rational and appropriate feedback and recommendations regarding your research will only further strengthen your work. 

For those students who are embedding Indigenised or decolonial theoretical frameworks, methodologies or methods in your research study, this issue is more nuanced. University is a particular type of interface where Indigenous knowledges can struggle to obtain legitimacy. Or as my former supervisor states, “the Australian university is grounded in imperial-capitalist-neo-liberal-colonial-patriarchy”. The implications of these structures have impacted the ways in which research has historically been and continues to be undertaken. Sharing particular aspects of your research to those who may not be as familiar with Indigenous research, may result in some awkward conversations (or potential tension) and may invite unhelpful feedback. However, it could also result in new learning experiences. Remember to trust your instinct!

See yourself as gradually becoming the expert

Towards the latter stages of the program, try to see yourself as becoming the expert in your chosen field. As your PhD research is specific and designed to contribute to new knowledge, there is probably no-one who knows more about your precise research topic than you. I have struggled with this piece of advice (mainly due to outdated Westernised discourse such as deficit discourse) but it is important to be confident in your growing skills as a researcher. The reality is that you are developing expertise and skills and are actually becoming an expert in your field. A deadly advisory team will help foster your development and growth as a researcher.

Take regular breaks and take leave if necessary

Our society values “doing more is better” and this can have implications. Your value or worth is not determined by how many hours you spend at your desk or words you write in a single day while on your third caffeinated beverage. So, remember to take breaks.

The PhD program can be a demanding program full of commitments, milestones and chapter deadlines. The workload can be intense at times, especially if you have family commitments and responsibilities. Sometimes, you need to take leave from the program. At the end of the day, the PhD program does not define you and your mental and emotional health is more important than a chapter deadline. If this is the case, I recommend that you discuss leave options with your advisory team. Your supervisors are there to support you. Deadly supervision includes supervisors realising the importance of these matters, checking in with you and supporting your wellbeing.

Extra tips:

Schedule regular meetings with your supervisors and eventually discuss potential thesis examiners with your advisory team

It is important to schedule regular meetings with your supervisors to discuss your research (fortnightly etc.). It is a deadly idea to discuss possible international and national examiners who work in your field of study with your advisory team before you reach your final thesis milestone. This process takes time. It is better to get a head start so your thesis can be marked as soon as possible after it is submitted.

Consider allocated research funds from your School

You may have some allocated research funds to assist with your candidature. I recommend using these research funds on particular experiences such as education conferences (Australian Association for Research in Education etc.) so that you can explore new educational research as well as network. Alternatively, you could use these research funds for professional editing services.

Be friendly to the Graduate School

If you have submitted your final thesis and have been waiting for updates, you may have considered contacting the Graduate School. Personally speaking, it took approximately six months for my thesis examination (during Covid) and I was not the only candidate in the School who experienced these lengthy delays. Waiting for your examination outcome can be quite a frustrating experience, especially if you have employment commitments, but remember to be kind to those in the Graduate School. You will eventually receive the outcome of your thesis. Remember that it is common for candidates to pass the final examination with amendments. A deadly advisory team will guide and support you during this time so that you can effectively make the revisions required by the examiners. 

Dr Mitchell Rom is a Lecturer with the Institute for Positive Psychology and Education at Australian Catholic University. Mitchell initially trained as a secondary teacher in the disciplines of English and History and holds a PhD in Indigenous education. His research interests include Education, Equity and Decoloniality. His research has attracted national awards including the Australian Association for Research in Education Betty Watts Indigenous Researcher Award. As a Nunukul/Ngugi researcher, Mitchell has also taught in initial teacher education and has worked across various levels of education. Contact him on LinkedIn.

Image in header are students from the Weemala Indigenous Student Success Unit at Australian Catholic University, Brisbane campus. The author has been given permission to use this image.

Deadly tips for students who want to do a PhD

higher education, Indigenous education, , , , ,

There are many opportunities and challenges associated with doing a PhD. It is a rewarding program that allows you to deeply explore a research area of interest. However, it is also recognised as a difficult academic pursuit and students may encounter various challenges in completing the program.

My own PhD, undertaken at The University of Queensland (UQ), explored the key learning, teaching and national education policy challenges in relation to Indigenous education at university. Since my conferral in 2022, I have been asked to share my professional advice for Indigenous students who are wanting to enrol in a PhD program and conduct research.

So, I decided to write this series of articles, over three separate posts, related to undertaking a PhD in Education, based off my lived experience as a Nunukul/Ngugi researcher. My aim in sharing these articles is to particularly assist Indigenous students who are doing a PhD in the field of education.

My lived experience

According to Universities Australia (2023), the number of Indigenous student enrolments in PhD programs has increased significantly over the past 13 or so years. For example, in 2011, there were 291 student enrolments compared to 594 enrolments in 2021. While these increasing numbers are positive, there is still further work required; there would need to be an additional 555 Indigenous postgraduate research enrolments to reach population parity of 3.2 per cent for 2021 (Universities Australia, 2023).

While I am writing from my own experience, the tips offered in this series may be relevant for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous students who are doing a PhD in Education. This series includes general advice as well as much more nuanced tips which may only relate to Indigenous students who are conducting research in the Indigenous space. Experiencing any program at university is subjective, and these tips are intended to serve as a guide only. Remember that the PhD journey is your own journey and you should navigate it in the way that works best for you. This article, which is the first in the series, shares five tips that may assist students who are transitioning into the program.

Select a topic of interest

The decision to undertake a PhD is an exciting time but can also be overwhelming given the diverse range of topics that you can choose to research. Selecting a research topic can sometimes be a complex process as it can be difficult to decide on the one topic you want to research for the next four (or more) years. Here are a few ideas that may spark your thinking. Consider areas of education that may be improved or where you see room for further development. What contribution would you like to make in education? Perhaps it could be related to curriculum, pedagogy or assessment. What areas of education were you drawn to as part of your previous studies? What level of education are you interested in researching?

If you are transitioning from completing your Masters, consider whether your research topic could be an extension of your existing work. If you are a classroom teacher or work in initial teacher education, perhaps you could connect your teaching experiences with your study.

Drawn to my topic

In my experience, it is common for Indigenous PhD students to choose an Indigenous-related research topic. I also did my research in Indigenous education because of my ontological connection to the space. I was also drawn to my topic because I wanted to contribute to education policy, which was informed by my experiences as a teacher and student. Although this may seem obvious, my advice is to choose a topic that interests you – whether that be in the field of literary criticism, educational leadership or Indigenous education policy. There is also no need to rush this process – you will be spending a significant amount of time with your topic so it is important to choose wisely. Given the length of the program, to maintain a level of motivation, you will need to select a research topic that interests you.

Choose a deadly advisory team

The PhD program is a long and at times emotional journey and it helps if you have supportive and culturally competent supervisors. The reality is that there is not a great number of Indigenous academics in the Education space. If you are seeking to involve a number of Indigenous scholars on your advisory team, you may have to shift these expectations. When I enrolled in the PhD program, there were no other Indigenous academics or PhD students based in the UQ School of Education. Until other Indigenous PhD students and academics arrived in the School, this was a fairly isolating experience.

Ultimately, my advisory team consisted of experienced non-Indigenous and Indigenous academics (teachers and non-teachers) who were based within and outside of the Education School. This advisory team brought different strengths to supervision. I recommend that you undertake some initial research based on those academics who are experienced in your research area and then contact and schedule to have a yarn with several academics to see if they may be a good fit for your research. Remember, you can always change supervisors if your situation changes.

Apply for scholarship support

Generally speaking, receiving a PhD scholarship will place you in a better financial position with your candidature. This may mean that you may not need to work or teach each semester and instead are able to focus on effectively developing your research. I encourage you to discuss potential university scholarships with your potential supervisors prior to commencing the program in order to place you in the best position to achieve your research goals. 

Find quality support

Finding quality support from people and groups was key for my successful navigation of the PhD program. I come from a predominately trade-based family of seven people, including six men and am the first in my family to graduate from university. While my family were supportive of my studies, this presented multifaceted challenges and so I understand the importance of finding like-minded people and quality support groups. Connect with people who have a shared experience of Higher Degree by Research (HDR) studies and who can offer support to you throughout the program.  

Within the early stages of your candidature, I encourage you to consider applying for the Professional Certificate in Indigenous Research at the University of Melbourne. This course, developed by Professor Marcia Langton, is designed specifically for Indigenous HDR students across Australia. The course provides an opportunity to discuss your research with like-minded Indigenous students and supportive academic staff. If you are potentially interested in applying for this course, I suggest that you have a conversation with your supervisors to see if this program aligns with your busy schedule. I have completed this course and recommend it to HDR students.

Furthermore, I also found support in various reading groups at university. This is discussed more in the second article.

Prioritise your wellbeing

The process of enrolling in a new program at university, navigating administrative issues, regularly meeting with potential supervisors and thinking about multiple aspects of your research study can be overwhelming. Remember to take care of your health and wellbeing during this potentially lengthy and complex process. Develop positive habits early to prioritise your wellbeing so that the program is sustainable and enjoyable.

Dr Mitchell Rom is a Lecturer with the Institute for Positive Psychology and Education at Australian Catholic University. Mitchell initially trained as a secondary teacher in the disciplines of English and History and holds a PhD in Indigenous education. His research interests include Education, Equity and Decoloniality. His research has attracted national awards including the Australian Association for Research in Education Betty Watts Indigenous Researcher Award. As a Nunukul/Ngugi researcher, Mitchell has also taught in initial teacher education and has worked across various levels of education. Contact him on LinkedIn.

Australian universities

Australian university staff now in chaos: No idea what will happen after December 31

higher education, higher education policy, , , ,

Imagine not knowing whether your job will exist after the holidays. The anxiety of wondering whether you should be budgeting for a well-deserved break with family or for the impending bills that might not be accounted for by your current salary in the new year. This is a reality for so many people working in Australian universities right now.

“I only have a contract until December 31. I have no idea what will happen after that.”

Released in February, the final report of the Universities Accord highlighted multiple crisis points for the Australian tertiary education sector. That includes inadequate funding, poor governance, wage thefts and a massive over reliance on casual staff. For people within the sector, this report provided some confirmation of their experience. The recommendations provided a small sliver of hope that we might see some change.

The Ending Bad Governance for Good report released by the NTEU last week paints an even more dire picture, while thousands of academics are facing uncertainty about whether they will have work in 2025.

Confusion over casualisation

The final report of the Universities Accord indicated that high rates of precarious employment in the sector negatively impacts the quality of teaching and research within universities, limiting the overall workforce capacity. The report cites data showing that over the past 30 years, rates of casual employment have consistently sat between 15.8% and 22.8% of all university staff.

These types of proportional data, however, report on Full Time Equivalent (FTE) positions. That obscure the actual number of people who are precariously employed. Estimates of the number of casually employed individuals vary wildly. There are suggestions that one FTE could really represent between 7 and 16 employees.

The recent NTEU report uses a conservative estimate of 6 people for every FTE role. That raises the overall proportion of individuals who are casually employed to an average of 49% across Australian universities. That’s nearly half of all employees

Moves to reduce the reliance on casual work are welcome – but they have also left institutions in a state of confusion. Universities are currently scrambling to respond to changes in the classification of casual work. The Fair Work Commission’s “Closing the Loopholes” Act involves a range of changes to strengthen the protection of employees. That includes changing the definition of casual employment and the process of conversion to permanent employment.

Approaches vary

Approaches have varied across the sector. But people who have worked at institutions for years or decades are now facing uncertainty about what their roles might look like in the new year or whether their much-needed positions will continue to exist.   

My research over the past eight years with colleagues focuses on the experiences of academics in insecure employment. We see an emerging sense of precarity throughout the sector that extends beyond those who are employed casually. Impacts of the COVID pandemic, reports of hundreds of millions of dollars in staff underpayment and other forms of wage theft, and multiple rounds of restructuring and redundancies contributes to a sense of unease across university campuses.

A crisis of governance

Adding to this unease, the new NTEU report paints a damning picture of university governance.

Neoliberal policies and reduced government funding ensure universities are now seen as businesses. 

But the NTEU report includes shocking examples of management practices that would not be accepted in the business world.

The report describes inflated executive salaries. Over 300 university executives nationally being paid more than the premiers of their respective states. More than $730M was paid to external consultants and contractors in 2023 alone.

This figure seems incomprehensible within a sector that promotes itself as having the ‘best and brightest’ within their own walls. While I note that the amount reported can include other professional services, it does not paint a substantially different picture from the Sydney Morning Herald’s report in 2023.

The NTEU report shows, on average, the 37 Australian public universities examined have paid external consultants almost $20M in one year ($19,836,011). Simultaneously, they are undergoing restructures and cutting programs. They are also cutting staff, who are dedicated to the core business of teaching and research, in precarious positions.

Changing landscapes of academic employment

Between 2020 and 2023, the number of job losses and newly added positions has bounced around dramatically, bolstering the NTEU report’s finding of poor workforce planning.

Over the period of peak COVID-19 pandemic, 4,760 people were made redundant within Australian universities. While 75% of these positions have been readvertised since 2021, universities across the country have announced impending redundancies and some have recently cut entire programs.

At the same time, universities are declaring their commitment to de-casualising their workforce. Our current research examines policies which relate to the shift away from casual employment to permanency

within Enterprise Bargaining Agreements from 35 Australian Universities. We found 27 universities have committed to creating new positions targeting the conversion of a minimum of 2,554 FTE casual positions to permanent roles. A fraction of the public funding spent on consultancy alone would be sufficient to fund these positions.

Universities are complex. Workforce planning is particularly complex in a sector that is governed by student numbers. One issue within the sector, however, is clear. 

A sense of precarity

All academics, regardless of their employment contracts, are feeling a sense of precarity. They are uncertain about their roles, their workload, and the future of the sector.

People who are currently wondering about their employment beyond next month are receiving reports that huge amounts of public funding has been spent on executive salaries and external consultants.

My hope is that public funding for higher education is committed to supporting those who teach our future doctors, lawyers, teachers, engineers, and nurses. My hope is that funding is dedicated to supporting researchers who engage in cutting edge research and providing training and employment for future researchers to do the same.

Jess Harris is an associate professor in the School of Education at the University of Newcastle. Her research is focused on the leadership and development of teachers and teaching within schools and through initial teacher education. She draws on a range of qualitative research methods, including conversation analysis and membership categorisation analysis.

Open access

Open access. Break the paywall. Reclaim knowledge now

open access, , , ,

In my academic career, I’ve always advocated for not-for-profit academic journals. These platforms support academic freedom and align with the principle that research should benefit society, not merely serve the interests of profit-driven corporations. Unfortunately, the academic publishing landscape, dominated by five major commercial players—Elsevier, Wiley, Taylor & Francis, Springer Nature, and SAGE—has become a bastion of profit, with universities and researchers paying steep costs for access to their own work.

The roots of this issue stretch back decades. Commercial publishers initially positioned themselves as facilitators of scholarly communication, offering the infrastructure to publish and distribute research globally. However, over time, these companies consolidated their influence and increasingly exploited their role as gatekeepers of knowledge. Today, the academic publishing landscape is so heavily controlled by these firms that universities must pay millions annually to access research produced by their own faculty members.

The Profits Behind the Paywall

The financial model behind commercial publishers is staggering. Elsevier, one of the largest academic publishers, has historically reported profit margins between 30% and 40%—outperforming even many tech giants like Google. This remarkable profitability is driven by a system where researchers, who receive little to no compensation for writing, reviewing, and editing, must rely on their institutions to pay high subscription fees to access the same content they’ve produced.

While some of these costs are tied to maintaining a peer-review process and publishing infrastructure, the scale of profit points to deeper systemic issues. This paywall not only limits the flow of knowledge but also exacerbates global inequalities in education and research. For scholars and institutions in developing countries, many of whom cannot afford the high subscription fees, access to critical research is often out of reach. The global knowledge divide deepens, reinforcing inequities between wealthier and lower-income regions.

Meanwhile, independent researchers and the general public, who stand to benefit greatly from access to cutting-edge scholarship, are often excluded entirely. This restricted access is particularly troubling at a time when misinformation spreads freely online while verified, peer-reviewed research remains behind paywalls.

Commercial Publishers’ Shifting Approach to Open Access

The increasing calls for open access (OA) have not gone unnoticed by commercial publishers. While they initially resisted the idea of free access to research, many have since adapted by offering OA options—but at a cost. These models, known as “gold open access,” require authors or their institutions to pay article processing charges (APCs) that can be prohibitively expensive. As a result, while OA is becoming more common, commercial publishers still manage to profit from researchers, either through subscription fees or APCs. This nuance complicates the narrative that publishers are entirely resistant to change; instead, they are reshaping their models to maintain profitability.

Despite these developments, the argument that high fees are necessary to cover the cost of peer review and production is increasingly challenged. Not-for-profit journals, especially those following the diamond open access model, have shown that scholarly publishing can be done ethically and affordably.

The Rise of Not-for-Profit Alternatives

Not-for-profit publishing models offer a promising alternative. Unlike commercial publishers, not-for-profit journals, such as those operating under the diamond open access model, charge no fees to authors or readers. These journals are typically funded through academic institutions, libraries, or government grants, ensuring that knowledge remains freely accessible to all.

Prominent examples of this include the Public Library of Science (PLOS) and arXiv. PLOS has revolutionized access to scientific research by offering freely available, peer-reviewed articles across various disciplines. However, it is important to note that PLOS operates on a “gold OA” model, meaning authors or their institutions pay APCs to make their articles accessible. This is different from the truly cost-free “diamond OA” model, which has yet to be widely scaled but holds potential for democratizing access without financial burdens on authors.

In contrast, arXiv, which offers a platform for preprints in fields like physics and mathematics, allows researchers to share their work almost immediately, before formal peer review. By offering a free alternative for early-stage research dissemination, arXiv helps bridge the gap between researchers and the broader public. However, it still relies on external funding and institutional support, highlighting the need for sustainable financial models for all not-for-profit journals.

The Challenge of Prestige in Academia

One of the greatest challenges not-for-profit and open-access journals face is their lack of prestige in comparison to long-established, high-impact commercial journals. In many fields, publishing in prestigious commercial journals remains the most reliable path to securing tenure, promotion, and grants. This reliance on commercial publications creates a cycle where early-career researchers, in particular, feel pressured to publish in these journals to establish their careers.

Institutions, too, are complicit in this system, rewarding publications in top-tier commercial journals while failing to provide similar recognition for work published in not-for-profit journals. As a result, even researchers who support open access often find themselves caught in a system that prioritizes impact factor over accessibility and public good.

Breaking this cycle will require a fundamental shift in how academic merit is measured. Universities must begin rewarding faculty for contributing to not-for-profit platforms and open access journals. Tenure and promotion criteria need to evolve to place greater value on the societal impact of research, not just the prestige of the journal in which it is published.

Emerging Technologies and Decentralized Platforms

The digital revolution offers new opportunities to disrupt the dominance of commercial publishers. Decentralized platforms, such as blockchain-based systems, could transform academic publishing by offering transparent, tamper-proof records of research submissions, peer review, and editorial decisions. Blockchain’s potential lies in reducing the need for centralized gatekeepers, giving researchers greater control over the dissemination of their work.

However, the application of blockchain to academic publishing is still experimental. While it holds promise for greater transparency and decentralization, it has not yet been widely adopted. Similarly, artificial intelligence (AI) tools are beginning to assist in the academic peer review process by helping to identify potential issues with research integrity or bias, streamlining workflows, and matching manuscripts with appropriate reviewers. While AI can enhance efficiency, its current role remains supplementary, not a replacement for human judgment in peer review.

For these technological innovations to gain traction, they will need institutional backing and investment. Universities and governments must commit to funding these platforms, ensuring they are integrated into mainstream academic publishing.

Institutional Support and Global Impact

Institutions and governments have a key role to play in supporting the open access movement. Some universities have already taken proactive steps in this direction. For example, Harvard University’s Office for Scholarly Communication advocates for open access policies across its faculties, and the European Commission’s Open Research Europe platform offers researchers a free, government-funded venue to publish their work.

These initiatives are critical in demonstrating the feasibility of open-access publishing, but much more is needed, particularly in developing regions. Scholars in the Global South, where research funding is scarce and access to high-cost journals is limited, stand to benefit most from open access. The democratization of knowledge can empower these researchers to contribute to the global scientific conversation on equal footing, helping to close the knowledge gap between wealthier and poorer nations.

However, for open access to become the norm, there must be a concerted effort from all stakeholders—governments, universities, funding agencies, and researchers themselves. Governments should mandate that publicly funded research be made available in open-access repositories, while universities should reexamine their tenure and promotion criteria to ensure that researchers are not penalized for publishing in not-for-profit, open-access journals.

A Call to Action for Equity in Knowledge Dissemination

Academic publishing should no longer be an elite, profit-driven enterprise. The solution is not just technological but ideological—rooted in a commitment to ensuring that research serves society, not corporations. By investing in not-for-profit models and supporting open-access platforms, we can ensure that the benefits of research are shared widely, beyond the academic bubble.

The time for systemic change is now. By supporting open access, institutions and governments can reclaim the dissemination of knowledge from profit-driven entities and restore the integrity of academic research.

Allen A. Espinosa is a postdoctoral fellow at the Faculty of Education, Charles University, in Prague, Czech Republic. He is currently on study leave as a professor of Science Education at the Educational Policy Research and Development Office of the Philippine Normal University. Allen holds a PhD from the University of Melbourne, Australia. His research covers a wide range of topics, including policy research in education, teacher education, information disorder, and social justice in education. You may reach him at allen.espinosa@pedf.cuni.cz. 

  

Budget 2024: The government must support universities, students – and research

Changes to higher education, equity in higher education, higher education, higher education funding, higher education policy, , , ,

This is the third in a series of posts on the 2024 Budget. Today: higher education by the University of Melbourne’s Abigail Payne, director of the Melbourne Institute. Last Friday: early childhood care and education by the University of New England’s Marg Rogers, postdoctoral fellow at the Manna Institute Last Thursday: school funding by Curtin University’s Matthew P. Sinclair, a lecturer in education policy.

I approached this year’s budget with excitement and with trepidation. 

Why excitement? This budget offered the potential to embrace some of the more positive insights from the Universities Accord Report.  Trepidation? Would we see the government fail to address the more challenging aspects of working at a university in Australia.

I had hoped to write about the promise of renewed investment in research, in the financing of universities, and supporting the important role that universities play for progressing innovation and delivering solutions that will support strong economic growth for Australia. 

Frankly not much was announced about any important investment that must be made to strengthen and invest in our universities.  

A quick search on terms revealed that the term “student” appeared 109 times, higher education 27 times, university 27 times, VET 25 times, TAFE 7 times, science 35 times, and research 65 times. This blog will focus on the budget announcements for addressing enrolment and the servicing of debt.  

Importance of Increasing Tertiary Education Attendance

Let me start with the promising information. A goal of creating a highly skilled workforce that includes a tertiary attainment target of 80 percent by 2050. This is both laudable and ambitious.  As Figure 1 depicts, Australia is ranked 10th amongst OECD countries for educational attainment (tertiary or higher) for individuals aged 25 to 34. The current rate for those living in Australia is 49 percent for men and is 63 percent for women. 

Is increasing access to universities only about the money?

The budget also recognizes the importance of broadening access to encourage more underrepresented students to attend university. This importance will include a commitment for more needs-based funding.  What this means for the budget is vague.  And is the solution to achieving both an 80 percent target and broadening access simply about money? Increased financial commitments were announced in the budget: $1.1 billion over five years for expanded access and $350.3 million to expand access to free university courses. 

Of course, money matters. 

But research has shown, time and time again, the returns to further education are positive. That has not wavered over time. Why are we not observing high demand for university places? 

Increasing educational attainment must include considerations: how we encourage students to prepare for pursuing these degrees; how we support our schools to deliver what is needed for success in university; and what we can do to support growth in the tertiary system. All that, while maintaining high standards to ensure graduating students are best prepared for opportunities that will require higher levels of skill and knowhow.

Addressing accumulated debt – will changing indexation solve the problem?

As has been well reported, as tuitions have risen, so has student debt. Figure 2 illustrates the dramatic increase in student debt based on tax data obtained from the Australian Tax Office, computed based on the year of the last observed loan for a student, reported in real ($2022) dollars. When HECS/HELP was introduced, the average accumulated debt at the end of schooling was $10,000 in today’s dollars.  Today, the average is nearly $40,000. If we look at remaining debt after five, ten, and fifteen years (ignoring those who have fully repaid their loan), those with debt after ten years are still not making much of a dent in repaying the debt.

Increasing debt, and in more recent years, increasing effective interest on this debt has risen. This means that it is taking longer to repay debt.  Figure 3 illustrates this fact.  Using tax data and the loan information from the Australian Tax Office, we depict the share of students who have repaid their student loan debt after five, ten, and fifteen years, respectively, based on the year of the last year a loan was received.  For example, if a student enrols in university in 2000 and takes out three years of loans between 2000 and 2002, the student is identified as having received her last year of loans in 2002.

What’s changed

When tuition was on the order of $2,000 (nominal) per year (1989 to 1995), approximately 30 percent of the students had repaid their loans within five years and 78 percent had repaid the loan within ten years. Fast forward to more recent periods: only 20 percent of students have repaid their loans within five years. Only 55 percent have repaid their loans within 10 years.  As debt has increased so has the time to repay. 

The budget has recognized the challenges of loan repayment. They have announced that the effective interest rate for these loans will change. The rate will be the lower of either the Consumer Price Index or the Wage Price Index. This use of different measures to capture “inflation” is welcomed. 

Are the cuts to debt fair?

The Government has also indicated it will cut $3 billion in student debt, providing relief for those with existing debt. That’s welcome. But is it fair for those who no longer hold debt but paid off their loans in recent years?  One should also consider the potential signal it serves regarding opportunities to pay off one’s loan faster than is required. And finally, what about those who have never held a loan but are struggling financially?

Confusions around tuition rates and debt repayment – does it cause a student to pause before enrolling?

Revisiting the question of how to increase participation in tertiary education, we should think about the role increasing debt plays on the decision to pursue a university degree. The income-contingent loan repayment scheme should be applauded for creating a structure to encourage participation while deferring payment for that participation.  

What started as a simple concept, however, has become convoluted. It may lead to confusion and a decision not to pursue further education. As Figure 4 illustrates, tuition has not only increased but there are differential tuition rates depending on the program of study.  This aspect makes sense if the tuition rate reflects the cost of delivering the given program of study. This simple depiction of three or four rates, however, quickly gets confusing when a student pursues courses in different programs. Once enrolled, depending on course selection, a student can end up facing differential course fees, making it even more challenging to understand the total cost of a degree before enrolling in university. 

Source: Parliamentary Library based on Department of Education,  https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp2021/Chronologies/HigherEducation

Potentially even more confusing for a student who wants to be fully informed before university registration is the repayment rates. The basic principle is that repayment is tied to earnings. With the minimum repayment amount equalling a percentage of one’s income.

But the percentage and thresholds vary across incomes and over time. Figure 5 depicts the minimum repayment rates. These have changed both with respect to what is owed as well as the income threshold for computing the amount owed. Given the repayment rates can adjust on a year to year basis, it would be very challenging to figure out at the time of university registration how long it might take to repay a student loan. 

Source: Parliamentary Library based on Department of Education,  https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp2021/Chronologies/HigherEducation

Encouraging greater participation and meeting 2050 targets

Encouraging greater participation in tertiary education must be more than making a proclamation. We can do more to invest in our institutions, to identify the factors that contribute to a decision to pursue a degree or diploma beyond secondary school, and to provide transparent mechanisms for capturing tuition and loan repayment. To encourage greater participation in tertiary education, information on costs and expectations for repayment should be clear and easy to understand. 

Government has made a move towards reducing the costs associated with loan indexation. It has also provided temporary loan forgiveness, and is investing to promote greater access to university. But it should do more to embrace and address the challenges students AND universities face.

Abigail Payne is the Director & Ronald Henderson Professor at the Melbourne Institute: Applied Economic & Social Research at the University of Melbourne. Her research is wide- ranging and includes the effects of policy on educational outcomes, schooling transitions, gender differences, and student performance; the determinants of poverty and disadvantage and the mechanisms for reducing poverty; and charitable giving and the role played by nonprofits in service provision.  

Graduate employment: Right now, the ‘fair-go’ isn’t fair enough

careers, Employability, equity in higher education, Universities Accord, , , , ,

A cornerstone of Australian values is the idea of a ‘fair go’: equality of opportunity regardless of personal circumstances. However, when it comes to higher education, decades of equity data reveal how university systems have failed to ensure this ‘fair go’. Nowhere is this more noted than in relation to gaining employment post-graduation.

Getting a job after completing a university degree is rarely straightforward. Only a minority of students walk straight from the graduating stage into permanent employment. However, students from equity backgrounds experience markedly different post-graduation trajectories compared to their peers from non-equity groups. In Australia,  students from a poorer background, living with a disability or with a first language other than English, consistently encounter ‘labour-market disadvantage’  with lower levels of employment 6 months after graduation. This is particularly noted for those living with disability, with a full-time employment rate of 68.4%, compared to 79.5% for those with no reported disability.

Statistics only tell one part of the story

Disparities in securing employment or job conditions are only some of the inequities experienced. Recent research indicates that those graduates from more diverse backgrounds also 1) have less opportunity to achieve ‘high status’ professional roles (e.g. medicine, law), 2) report differences in hourly wages and also, 3) experience more complex, interrupted pathways to employment.

There are many reasons for these differences not least of which is these graduates may not have access to necessary, but often obscure, networks or information needed to obtain professional roles. For example, graduates who were the first in their families or communities to attend university do not have a ‘guide on the side’ who can provide insight or advice about the fundamentals of job seeking. In recent research, graduates repeatedly told me how this was a hidden, but significant, barrier. For example, one survey respondent explained how seeking employment after graduation was like “navigating uncharted water”, another reflected on the difficulty of “understanding […] the white collar world” and sadly one defeatedly stated: “I was very ignorant in what came after.”

What’s the difference?

In their reflections, there was a perception of “difference” that was implicitly and overtly experienced within the workplace, tied up with their family background and biography:

Perhaps if someone else in my family had graduated and embarked upon a professional career they also could have given me advice about building the foundations early, such as doing internships and volunteering in places.

What this and other quotes indicated was that while these students had received a university degree, there was more practical and applied knowledges needed to achieve their end goals. Not only did they need to aim for good grades but also, participate in internships, gain volunteer experience, network with future employers and proactively engage with the careers services on-campus. As one student so eloquently summed up, many ‘assumed the degree would be all I needed’.

The promises of university education were not delivered for some and the frustration and anger of this situation was palpable in survey responses:

The universities just pretend that getting that piece of paper is all you need, like they are selling ice cream. (Female Survey Respondent)

We need to think about entry and exit

The last two decades have seen huge changes to the university sector with increasing numbers and diversity in our student populations. While policy and procedures have engaged with the implications of this as students consider and enter university, those who are exiting the higher education system have not attracted a similar level of attention. We are experiencing a highly competitive job market with a global oversupply of graduates and this, combined with the need to be ‘employable’ means that those students with less access to necessary material and personal resources may be at a marked disadvantage within the graduate employment market.

The recent Accord Interim Discussion paper proposes a range of actions designed to ensure that the skills and knowledge developed by students are readily transferable to the workplace. The paper calls for a ‘modular, stackable, integrated approach to course design’ complemented by a framework for coordinated work placements as well as ‘earn while you learn’ and other financial support for undergraduates.

What they need

But what the graduates in this study indicated was a need for more practical and applied careers-related support deliberately targeted at that final transition: the move between university into employment. Suggested initiatives included proactive careers advice contextualised to different stages of the degree journey; ongoing professional mentoring that commenced early in the degree and extended beyond graduation; opportunities to have meaningful contact with professionals with similar (equity) backgrounds to their own; and explicit teaching about protocols and expectations within a professional workplace environment. Those changes are not difficult but such initiatives do require a ‘shift’ in mindset across the university sector – to one that more readily embraces and desires a relationship with students that extends beyond the graduation stage.

Sarah O’Shea is the dean, graduate research at Charles Sturt University, a Churchill Fellow, principal fellow of the Higher Education Academy and leading an ARC Discovery Project exploring the persistence behaviours of first in family students.

Working future: Now, how to build a bridge

higher education, vocational education and training (VET), , , ,

The Federal Government’s white paper Working Future argues for closer cooperation between vocational education and training (VET) and higher education (HE). The goal is a seamless array of lifelong education opportunities for Australians. 

Here’s the problem. VET and HE don’t always work well together, prompting commentators to characterise the Australian tertiary sector as a ‘binary’. But that’s not my only concern – the white paper reflects a degree of amnesia about the history of the sector. The silos of VET and HE are largely creations of government policy over several decades.

The call for a more effective tertiary sector runs up against a complex of differences: dimensions of curriculum, pedagogy, assessment, teacher preparation, regulation, funding and marketisation. These individual differences have sprung from government policy, even in relation to fundamentally educational categories.

One of these differences stands out as fundamental for both educators and policy makers. Curriculum is fundamental because it expresses the meaning of educational intentions and experience. In the context of Australian tertiary education and its problematic binary structure, the importance of curriculum is amplified. 

On one side of the tertiary binary, a single curriculum model has been successfully imposed on providers and teachers while the other side has managed to avoid it. On the VET side, ‘competency-based training’ (CBT) was implemented as a system-wide model for all government-funded provision. Its justification was economic and social. In the 1980s, the Labour Government initiated sweeping reforms to reposition Australia as a global economic competitor across its portfolios, including VET. Higher education was targeted too, but it effectively resisted imposition of a CBT approach.  

The upshot was that HE was left to follow its own lights in regard to curriculum. Of course, there are broad structures that impinge on curriculum in HE, such as the Australian Qualifications Framework, but their level of prescription is modest, at least in terms of implications for actual curriculum. 

The lack of centralised control over HE curriculum turned out to be a boon for that side of the tertiary sector. It means HE providers can exercise maximum creativity in relation to curriculum, and rest on the expertise and insight of their teachers and researchers to craft learning experiences that directly reflect the requirements of disciplines, study areas and professions with a stake in HE. 

Even where standards are produced by professional associations and tied to program accreditation, HE providers have latitude to meet those standards in unique and innovative ways and the conceptualisation of standards is specific to the industry involved (rather than a generic model like CBT).

It is worth pointing out that if professional standards become too prescriptive then curriculum quality suffers and teachers may become alienated. 

That is precisely what has happened in VET. CBT can be regarded as a highly prescriptive implementation of standards relating to industries served by that system. Instead of high-level expressions of essential capabilities such as those prepared by Engineers Australia and used in HE engineering programs, competency standards in VET are intricately detailed and include very specific requirements about what knowledge and skills are supposed to underpin competent performances and how those performances should be assessed. 

The curricular impact of adherence to such standards is hard to overstate. It is possible to imagine that very uninformed providers and teachers might benefit from that level of prescription, but for the bulk of educators in VET the imposition is frustrating and even demoralising. As such, the quality of the whole system may be compromised through overprescription of industry standards. 

But it takes educational expertise to untangle many of these issues. At the level of policy making, high levels of prescription may be reassuring.  Policy makers may find it difficult to trace ramifications for curriculum innovation and quality.

From a curriculum angle, an effective tertiary sector in Australia would require stepping back and considering how to find a productive balance between industry or professional standards on the one hand, and curriculum innovation on the other. 

Critical here is the level of prescription attached to standards. Those representing industries and professions should leave educational decisions to those with educational expertise. As the VET experience demonstrates, it is easy for industry representatives to stray into the realm of curriculum decision-making and thereby impose constraints on educational innovation and quality that in turn undermine provider and teacher expertise and motivation. 

A more effective tertiary sector would be one where great care is taken to promote curricular creativity across both VET and HE. Winding back the curricular constraints implicit in the Australian implementation of CBT in VET is one way to address the binary of our tertiary sector. At the same time, those who work in HE should remain vigilant. It is not hard to imagine a scenario in which standards for an area like Initial Teacher Education (ITE) become politicised and from there become more prescriptive and exert stronger influence over actual curriculum in ITE degrees. In a scenario like that, the quandary in which expert and caring educators in VET find themselves could become a reality for education academics responsible for ITE.

This Blog is based in part on a recent MCERA Webinar (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsQKX6SoReU) and on a paper by Hodge, Guthrie, Jones and Waters currently under review. Contact Steven Hodge (s.hodge@griffith.edu.au) for a copy of the draft.

Steven Hodge is a member of the Griffith Institute for Educational Research (GIER) and of the School of Education and Professional Studies at Griffith University, where he is Director of the Master of Education and Graduate Certificate in Professional Learning programs. He is immediate past president of the Australasian Vocational Education and Training Association and key contributor to debate in Australian post-compulsory education.

PhD

Want to do a PhD now? Here’s what you should know

PhD education, PhD work, , , , , , , ,

Research in schools is messy. Things change fast and decisions need to be made on the fly. As PhD students doing research in schools, we (Kate and Matt) learned that challenges quickly arise and that tough decisions need to be made.

Our PhD research took place in vastly different contexts. Kate went to Zimbabwe to research the proliferation of philanthropic edu-tourism, and Matt explored differences in the teaching of drama and maths at a school in a regional town in NSW. Despite these “worlds-away” classrooms, we experienced similar challenges and discovered a gap in the literature on education fieldwork for postgrad students.  

That’s what our new paper explores,and from that we have four key lessons for PhD students. 

Four key lessons

We started our PhDs by ‘going with the flow’ of doctoral study. This meant we designed our research with the support of our supervisors. We presented our research plans to a panel of academics. We gained ethics approvals to conduct our studies. We undertook recruitment procedures. We went into ‘the field’ to collect data at schools. Then the flow changed. 

Our paper explains how this early ‘flow’ became more like ‘rapids’ (Lonergan & Cumming, 2017) as we undertook classroom-based research in Australia and Zimbabwe.  

In our research, we faced challenges and had to act in the moment. One such moment was when the classroom teacher left the classroom Kate was observing. What do you do? If you leave the room, where do you go? If you choose to stay, how long do you wait for them to return? If the class begins to misbehave, do you step into a teacher role or do you stay silent? If, and how, do you have a discussion with the teacher and ask them not to do this in the future?  

Someone’s missing

In another example, the teachers participating in Matt’s study were both absent from school but failed to tell him beforehand. This encounter resulted in wasted time travelling to and from the school. It also highlighted that research involves adaptive responses and planning on-the-go.  

Together, our reflections throughout the paper shed light on some of the emotional challenges during fieldwork. Even though one of us was geographically close and the other was far away from our supervisors, we were both unable to access their knowledge in the moments of shifting plans.  

Four key lessons

Here are four key lessons we wish we knew before starting fieldwork: 

  1. Communication is key. Having clear expectations and conversations about the research with the school community is integral to the success of the research. Do not assume that everyone in the school community will understand the intricacies of your study – the reality is this is an ongoing part of the process.  
  2. Developing rapport with research participants is crucial. While it is important to ‘give back’ in research and avoid disruptions to schools, it is equally important to be on the same page with participants about your role/s within the research. 
  3. Plan for a range of different scenarios, be open to how you might negotiate them as they unfold. Anticipating changes to your research plan may help you cope when these changes happen and allow you to know which components of your research plan you are willing to change or remove.  
  4. Keep a diary. Your field notes are hugely valuable when it comes to writing up and reflecting on your research. And a daily diary reminds you of all the things you’ve achieved (big and little) when the going gets tough. 

Continued conversation

We hope that others find these key lessons useful in thinking more broadly about their data collection plans. We are also mindful doctoral students have a range of resources at their fingertips when preparing for fieldwork that should not be overlooked. PhD supervisors are vital in the learning and development of doctoral students. Methods textbooks abound. And, there is a range of very insightful blogs, such as The Thesis Whisperer and Patter. Our research brings attention to these resources and the need for continued conversations about fieldwork.  

Kathleen Smithers is a lecturer in the School of Education at Charles Sturt University, Australia. Kathleen has worked across a number of projects with a focus on the sociology of education and higher education. Her doctoral thesis investigated developmentourism in schools in Zimbabwe.

Matthew Harper is a PhD candidate and research assistant across a range of projects at the Teachers and Teaching Research Centre, School of Education, University of Newcastle, Australia. His doctoral thesis compares teaching practice and the student experience in high school mathematics and drama.

Burn it off: stop racism

How to stop racism in class: burn it off

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, Indigenous Curriculum, Indigenous education, Indigenous learning, The Voice Referendum, , , , , , , ,

“You’re like the token black kid in the class”: the continued need for Indigenisation of curriculum to support Indigenous student university completion rates and stop racism

It is our hope that in 2023 The Voice referendum will bring change. We hope change will include adopting the many recommendations of national reports to improve higher education access, participation and completions for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

Many Indigenous scholars and their non-Indigenous allies feel enormous frustration. Their voices are not heard. They are rendered silent by inaction to implement national recommendations. For example, the Universities Australia Indigenous Strategy outlined what universities should do. They should commit to having “processes that ensure all students will encounter and engage with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural content as integral parts of their course of study, by 2020”. Important work is occurring in universities to embed Indigenous content within university courses but it has yet to be implemented strongly across all universities.

RELATED EVENT

Indigenous Studies and Courageous Conversations

Symposium co-hosted by UQ and the Australia Academy of the Humanities. September 28 and 29, 2023.

What the Accord Interim Report says

The recent Accord Interim Report notes Indigenous students continue to be marginalised in universities and there is an urgent need to increase the numbers of Indigenous students undertaking university study. The Accord Interim Report also reported that Go8 universities were lagging behind in terms of Indigenous student enrolments. But high enrolment numbers of Indigenous students do not necessarily equate to completion of university studies. The national data indicates that, the nine-year completion rates for Indigenous students are 50 per cent — significantly below the 71 per cent for non-Indigenous students.

Stop racism in university classrooms

The impact of racism on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander student university experiences and completion rates can not be underestimated. 

Our research has found that racism and the lack of Indigenous perspectives in the curriculum are key barriers to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students completing their degrees.

Many of the Indigenous graduates from five universities interviewed in our study reflected on their experiences in classrooms and their experiences of being asked by academics to speak on behalf of Indigenous people:

“It was mostly experiences like being called out in class as to speak to a universal Indigenous experience or being called out to act as a representative of a cultural ideal” (Bachelor of Arts graduate)

Graduates also spoke about experiences of racism from peers and staff:

“There is racism in classes … I had students go, ‘Oh, you must have got scholarships for coming here’ when they worked out that I was Indigenous, or ‘Oh, did you take a bridging pathway?’ ‘No, I actually got here the same way that a lot of people in this room got here’…” (Bachelor of Science and Bachelor of Arts graduate)

“I guess the racism at a university like [this one] that is full of people with white fragility and white privilege, has always hung over my thinking around what I actually received from [this university]… People being blatantly racist and really showing their white fragility in the way they operated towards me” (Bachelor of International Relations graduate).

Why there is a need for further Indigenisation of curriculum to stop racism

Indigenisation of curriculum is one way to address racism. The Universities Australia Indigenous Strategy 2017–2020 acknowledged the inherent value of Aboriginal peoples’ unique knowledge systems. Important work has been undertaken by universities to develop frameworks and design principles to guide Indigenisation of curriculum (e.g., Al-Natour and Fredericks, 2016; Bunda, 2022; Howlett et al., 2013). 

The process of Indigenising curriculum is complex, and numerous researchers have noted the institutional support required, the challenges of poorly taught curriculum that can reinforce stereotypes and resistance from students particularly from mandatory curriculum.

Many of the graduates we interviewed noted that much more work needs to be done within the universities they studied at to focus on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander content and knowledges and draw further on Indigenous perspectives within the curriculum and content.

Where to from here?

Universities are still not necessarily a safe places for Indigenous students. Danger and a lack of cultural safety can be found in classrooms when Indigenous students are called out as “experts”, when peers question their identity and ask culturally insensitive questions, and when lecturers do not include “meaningful, appropriately developed and appropriately resourced” Indigenous content in curricula so that Indigenous students can see themselves in the curriculum.

Universities must continue to focus efforts towards educating academic staff and students to be more culturally competent through the inclusion of Indigenous perspectives within curriculum. Indigenisation of curriculum requires institutional support, and it also requires critical self-reflection by non-Indigenous educators. This is the only way to stop racism

Recommendations

As part of our larger research project, recommendations were developed for universities and include:

  • University academic staff should ensure their classrooms are strongly anti-racist and address any issues of racism within the classroom.
  • University leadership needs to ensure more cultural competency training opportunities for academic staff, professional staff, and students.
  • University faculties and academics should work collaboratively with Indigenous centre/unit staff and Indigenous academics to ensure Indigenous perspectives are strongly embedded in course curricula.

It is important to note that these recommendations are not particularly new and they echo previous recommendations. There is enormous frustration felt by many Indigenous scholars and their non-Indigenous allies whose voices are not heard. They are rendered silent by this inaction to implement national recommendations.

Collins-Gearing and Smith use the metaphor of the need to “burn off” the disciplines to Indigenise curriculum in order to “clean up the landscape so that new, transformative possibilities may grow”. Burning off continues to need to occur in universities to stamp out racism and clear the smoke to allow Indigenous students to see themselves within the curriculum.

From left to right: Bronwyn Fredericks is a professor and DVC Indigenous Engagement, University of Queensland. She tweets at @bronfredericks. Katelyn Barney, PhD, is a senior lecturer in the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies Unit and the School of Music, University of Queensland. She tweets at @drkatelynbarney. Tracey Bunda is Professor of Indigenous Education, University of Queensland. Kirsten Hausia is Strategic Project and Engagement Coordinator, Murrup Barak, Melbourne Institute for Indigenous Development, University of Melbourne. Anne Martin is Director of Tjabal Centre, Australian National University. She tweets at @MartinAnne139. Jacinta Elston is affiliated with Monash University. She tweets at @JacintaElston. Brenna Bernardino is a research associate at LPC Consulting Associates and was a Research Assistant on the project. She tweets at @brennabernardino.

Patience, persistence and persuasion: the how-to of Indigenous curriculum practice by Susan Page

Be brave: how to Indigenise the curriculum by Alanna Kamp