Combined Courses of Study

Equity group access and participation at the bachelor (honours/pass) level

Executive summary

This paper presents a comprehensive overview of gender enrolment patterns in combined courses at the bachelor (honours/pass) level between 1997 and 1999. The paper focuses attention on the six designated equity groups and, in this respect, first reports and discusses access and participation indicators for women in combined courses that encompass at least one of the following non-traditional major fields of study: Agriculture, Architecture, Business, Engineering and Science. The general position of the other five equity groups in relation to combined courses at the bachelor (honours/pass) level is then outlined.

The summary below provides a snapshot of current enrolment trends in bachelor level combined courses across the higher education sector and is supported by several figures. Figure 1 depicts gender participation patterns in both combined and all courses in relevant broad fields of study at the bachelor (honours/pass) level in 1999. Figures 2 and 3 show the 1999 access and participation rates for students with other designated equity characteristics in combined courses at the bachelor level, and at the bachelor level generally.

• Approximately 10% of all students at the bachelor (honours/pass) level were enrolled in combined courses of study in 1999, and the vast majority of these were participating in dual degrees.
• Overseas student enrolments in combined courses at the bachelor level grew at a faster rate than domestic Australian student enrolments although, overall, their percentage share of total enrolments was small.
• In the domestic Australian combined course student population, 91% of students were under the age of twenty-five and 55% were women.
• At the broad field of study level, women’s access to bachelor level combined courses exceeded the 40% threshold target in all five non-traditional fields. The 1999 access rates for women in combined courses that encompassed three of these fields ­ Architecture, Engineering and Science ­ were higher than the rates for all women in these fields at the bachelor level.
• At the broad field of study level also, participation rates for women in bachelor level combined courses were above the 40% threshold target in four non-traditional broad fields of study, with Architecture being the exception. In Agriculture, Engineering and Science, women participated in combined courses at a higher rate than they did in these broad fields at the bachelor level generally (refer Figure 1).
• Although the focus on designated equity groups precluded consideration of male participation in combined courses, it was apparent at the broad field of study level that the participation rate for males in combined courses that encompassed the broad field of Education was higher than the rate for all males in this field at the bachelor level (refer Figure 1).

Figure 1 Gender participation in combined courses by broad field of study at the bachelor level in 1999 (%)

top

Note Participation is the share members of an equity group have of total student enrolments. The participation reference value for women is 50%. The threshold target for women's participation in non-traditional fields of study is 15% for Engineering and 40% for the four other fields.

• The broad field of Business attracted substantially more combined course enrolments than any other non-traditional field. Combined course access and participation rates for women in all three major fields were above target.
• The vast majority of combined course enrolments within the broad field of Engineering were located in the major field of Engineering and women’s access in this field was surprisingly high (19.5%). The rate of participation for women in all three major fields exceeded the target in 1999 and was highest in Engineering (19.4%).
• Combined courses that encompassed the major field of Science ­ General were extremely popular amongst women, as evidenced by the current access rate of 50.6%. Their participation rate in 1999 was 48.8%.
• Approximately 25% of all students who commenced a combined course in the broad field of Science in 1999 were located in the major field of Computer Science/Information Systems. The rate of access for women in this field was substantially below target (26.3%), as was their participation rate (24.8%).
• Women’s access to combined courses in the major field of Mathematics did not improve during the 1997­1999 period and remained below target (37.2%). Their participation rate was lower at 34.4%.
• Interest in combined courses that encompassed the major field of Physical Sciences grew but access and participation rates for women in 1999 remained below target at 24.0% and 19.5% respectively.
• Males from non-English speaking backgrounds had high rates of access to combined courses, relative to their representation in the national population and to their access rate at the bachelor level generally (refer Figure 2).
• Other male and all female students with equity characteristics had very low rates of access to combined courses relative to their representation in the national population (refer Figure 2).
• Without exception, access rates for females with designated equity characteristics in combined courses in 1999 either matched or marginally exceeded the access rate for their equity group at the bachelor level generally.
• With the exception of males from non-English speaking backgrounds again, males and females with designated equity characteristics participated in combined courses at a very low rate relative to their representation in the national population (refer Figure 3).
• Combined course participation rates for females from non-English speaking backgrounds and those with a disability did, however, exceed the participation rate for students with these equity characteristics at the bachelor level generally.

Figure 2 Equity group access to combined courses at the bachelor level in 1999 (%)

top

Figure 3 Equity group participation in combined courses at the bachelor level in 1999

top

The findings of the present study first suggest, then, that combined courses may be providing women with a more attractive pathway into non-traditional fields of study and, in so doing, are positively influencing the historic gender imbalances within these. The current combined course access and participation indicators for women in the broad fields of Engineering and Science are especially noteworthy in this context, but some supporting evidence for this hypothesis was also found in the broad fields of Architecture and Agriculture.

From the policy perspective, the above hypothesis will require further investigation. In particular, it will be important to more closely examine the specific degree combinations that are attracting the interest of women and motivating them to pursue studies in those fields where their representation remains unacceptably low. Qualitative research, oriented toward identifying the underlying factors that subtly encourage or discourage women from entering dual degree programs encompassing a non-traditional field, will clearly assist in this endeavour.

Second, the findings provide compelling evidence that neither the growth in combined courses per se, nor the existent variety of course combinations, have advanced educational equity for females and males with other equity characteristics (excl. non-English speaking background males). Again, the scope of the present study did not support an investigation of the degree combinations students with other equity characteristics are pursuing, nor a considered analysis of the new and/ or qualitatively different barriers that mitigate against them first entering, and then perhaps continuing in, dual degree programs.

Recognising that groups of male and female students with equity characteristics are, in the main, under-represented at the bachelor level generally, this study clearly highlights the importance of continuing to monitor and explore gendered access and participation equity group trends in dual degrees in the future. With prescribed completion times of between 4­7 years, it will also be important in the next one to two years to evaluate retention and success indicators for dual degree students with equity characteristics.

Finally, the current findings in respect of both women in non-traditional fields and students with other equity characteristics will attain heightened significance in the policy arena if dual degrees do, indeed, give graduates a real edge in the market place. Thus as well as maintaining a research focus on dual degree trends within the higher education sector, it is recommended that future research be selectively directed toward an analysis of labour market experiences and outcomes for dual degree graduates.

Previous | Contents | Next

Return to the Top of the Page

contact details  |  search  |  archive search  |  publications  |  site map  | subscribe
career information | education network australia (EdNA)  
australian education international | prime minister's web site 

Any comments or queries should be sent to: wwweditor@dest.gov.au

This page was last updated on Tuesday, 26 August 2008
Department of Education, Science and Training
Copyright © Commonwealth of Australia
DETST Web Site Privacy Statement
Disclaimer