E I P
A Case Study
97/13
Eleanor Ramsay
Deborah Tranter
Mari Kain
Robert Sumner
University of South Australia
September 1997
Higher Education Division
Department of Employment, Education,
Training and Youth Affairs
| |
E I P |
||
| Cross-sectoral Linkages: A Case Study |
|||
97/13 Eleanor Ramsay University of South Australia September 1997 |
|||
| Evaluations and Investigations Program Higher Education Division Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs |
|
||
©Commonwealth of Australia 1997
ISBN 0 641 23689 5
This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Australian Government Publishing Service. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the manager, Commonwealth Information Services, Australian Government Publishing Service, GPO Box 84, Canberra ACT 2601.
[next chapter] [top of document]
5. Faculty Practices and Procedures
6. Commencing Undergraduate Student Profile: University of South Australia
8. Conclusions and Recommendations
Appendix 1: University of South Australia Mission Statement
Appendix 2: University of South Australia Policies and Guidelines
Appendix 5: University of South Australia and TAFE Credit Transfer Arrangements November, 1996
Appendix 6: Staff Survey Instrument
Appendix 7: Sample Credit Transfer Statement
Appendix 8: Sample Recognition of Prior Learning Statement
Appendix 9: Definition of Equity Groups
Appendix 10: Student Survey Instrument
[next chapter] [contents]
Many people have assisted in the preparation of this report, and we would like to take the opportunity to sincerely thank them for their valuable contribution. The Planning Unit of the University of South Australia has provided extensive assistance and support; in particular, James Crockart produced copious quantities of statistical data, Mary Piscioneri helped administer the student surveys, coded and entered responses, and typed some draft chapters, and Chris Phillips produced a number of spreadsheets and tables. Simon Charlton provided invaluable assistance, analysing survey response data, and Trish Hanlon worked tirelessly typing the report and preparing the final documentation.
Special thanks, too, must go to Adrienne Nieuwenhuis, Holly McCausland and Rosemary Luke for their advice and editing assistance, and to Steven Barrett for his preliminary project work and development of the student questionnaires. Our appreciation is also extended to the large number of staff and students of the University who generously gave their time to assist this study, and without whom this report would not have been possible.
An advisory committee for the project was appointed by the Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs (DEETYA) in consultation with the project directors. The committee comprised:
Our gratitude is extended to the Evaluations and Investigations Program of the Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs for providing the funding for this study.
Eleanor Ramsay
Deborah Tranter
Mari Kain
Robert Sumner
May 1997
[next chapter] [previous chapter] [contents]
As part of the restructuring of higher education in the late 1980s and the establishment of the Unified National System of Higher Education (UNS) in Australia in 1989, universities were encouraged to embrace the principles of credit transfer, both within the sector and across sectors. The establishment of the UNS saw the emergence of a number of new universities, including the University of South Australia, formed in 1991 through the amalgamation of the South Australian Institute of Technology and three campuses of the South Australian College of Advanced Education. Both former institutions had developed close links with the Technical and Further Education (TAFE) sector over many years, links which included vocational foci in academic activities, complementary teaching philosophies, and extensive credit transfer arrangements.
The University’s commitment to cross-sectoral linkages and credit transfer is partly the result of the historical relationships of its precursor institutions with technical and further education, but is also an outcome of its commitment to providing higher education for students from a diversity of backgrounds. Its Act of Establishment (1991) charged the University with responsibility for providing educational opportunities ‘as the University thinks appropriate to meet the needs of Aboriginal people ... and groups within the community that the University considers have suffered disadvantages in education.’
The commitment has been expressed through a comprehensive policy framework and Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), later a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), with the South Australian Department for Employment, Training and Further Education (DETAFE). In addition, all faculties have developed formal statements detailing credit transfer arrangements with corresponding TAFE courses and their faculty specific practices and procedures. A number of faculties have a long history of credit transfer arrangements and reciprocal involvement in course development and review committees with TAFE which predate the formation of the University. These largely informal arrangements were formalised following the signing of the MOA and the establishment of the joint DETAFE:USA Steering Committee. Areas of the University have also had a tradition of recognising the importance of prior uncredentialled learning (e.g. in Art and Design) where applicants have been required to submit portfolios, attend interviews and/or sit challenge examinations to demonstrate their knowledge and skills.
This study aimed to develop a profile of the experiences of commencing students at the University of South Australia who had previously undertaken TAFE studies or had acquired learning outside the formal tertiary or secondary education sectors, with a particular focus on equity and access issues. The findings were to identify good practice, to assist the University and the higher education system to identify an educational environment that contributed to the success of this group of students, to inform the University and the system about future policy development with respect to credit transfer and the recognition of prior learning (RPL), and to enhance the willingness of the University and the higher education sector in general to recognise relevant prior learning, including experiential learning.
Significant progress has been made in the area of credit transfer, and to a lesser extent recognition of prior learning, since the White Paper of 1988. Universities within the UNS have been required to provide a framework in which credit transfer can take place. However, policies and practices vary enormously and not all universities have made significant progress. Studies during the 1990s have identified wide variations in the application of policy, despite substantial evidence pointing to positive outcomes in those institutions in which credit transfer and recognition of prior learning policies and procedures have been implemented.
The University of South Australia has developed and adopted a comprehensive policy framework for credit transfer, articulation and studies-in-lieu. In addition, guidelines and procedures relating to recognition of prior learning have been developed and implemented, although these are not yet as widely implemented as its credit transfer policies and procedures.
While there have been difficulties in accurately recording credit transfer and recognition of prior learning data at the University of South Australia, analysis of commencing undergraduate student data over the years 1993–1996 has revealed that up to a quarter of these students had undertaken some TAFE studies prior to enrolling at the University. Almost 60 percent of these students were enrolled in two faculties; Business and Management, and Humanities and Social Sciences.
Of those students with prior TAFE experience, student records indicate that, in 1996, around 20 percent were granted credit in their University course on the basis of these studies, with the most usual amount being 36 credit points (i.e. the equivalent of one full year of university study), although this varied widely across faculties.
Further analysis of the group of students with prior TAFE studies has shown that they were generally less likely to be women (although more likely to be enrolled in a non-traditional area of study (WINS)), less likely to be non-English speaking background and marginally less likely to be of low socio-economic status, rural or isolated backgrounds than other students. They were, however, more likely to be indigenous students and studying externally.
Admission to the University on the basis of TAFE (as distinct from with TAFE studies) is an important mode of entry for all equity groups except non-English speaking background. In addition, students admitted on this basis and analysed by faculty recorded higher or equal success rates compared to the University average. In general, equity groups had lower success rates than the University average, with the exception of women and rural students. Indigenous students had the lowest success rates. Further, students admitted on the basis of prior TAFE studies showed consistently higher attrition rates than average, except in the Faculty of Aboriginal and Islander Studies, where these students had generally lower attrition rates than the Faculty average. For each equity group, TAFE entrants had higher attrition rates than the average, with the exception of indigenous students. External students who entered on this basis also had lower attrition rates than average. It can be speculated that the comparatively high attrition rates of TAFE entrants are a reflection of the older age of these students and their increased likelihood to be combining study with work and other responsibilities.
The results of the student survey raised a number of issues for the University of South Australia, many of which are likely to have implications for other universities. Analysis revealed that, generally, students were not finding the process of credit transfer easy. There is a need for wider and more effective communication of information and promotion of policies for credit transfer, including recognition of prior learning, both within and outside the University. Up to date, user friendly information online is required, as is more information during the admissions processes. A number of respondents proposed that information on credit transfer arrangements could be mailed to applicants with their offers of admission. It was also suggested that an increased level of automation of credit transfer (e.g. transferability of subject codes) to facilitate the often confusing and bureaucratic credit transfer processes be put in place. This communication of information should be accompanied by staff development and training, particularly for those staff, both academic and general, involved in advising students and implementing the policies and procedures.
Respondents reported a degree of reluctance on the part of some faculties to grant credit. In cases where credit transfer arrangements are well established and reasonably well organised, however, (e.g. the Faculty of Business and Management), students have developed high expectations of credit transfer arrangements, and criticisms of the limitations of formal arrangements are raised, particularly in faculties where direct links with relevant TAFE programs are common. It is important that formal arrangements do not become too rigid. The aim should be to facilitate the most efficient transfer of students from one level of credential to another, thus eliminating the need for wasteful and frustrating duplication of learning.
In many cases, respondents commented that they had not applied for credit because they believed their TAFE studies were unrelated to their university studies. This is an additional area about which students could be better informed and faculties more flexible, allowing more opportunities for credit to be granted towards electives and broadening studies.
While a number of concerns were raised in relation to the University’s credit transfer arrangements, there are some areas which represent good practice, particularly in the Faculties of Business and Management, Engineering and the Environment, Information Technology, and Humanities and Social Sciences.
In general, faculties with a longer history of credit transfer arrangements with TAFE were likely to be more committed to cross-sectoral linkages and credit transfer, and to accept students with prior TAFE studies as eligible for admission to and credit towards their programs. However, staff attitudes towards credit transfer and recognition of prior learning are not simply determined by a tradition of involvement in cross-sectoral linkages. Indeed, it seems that attitudes vary significantly in relation to the discipline being taught.
Academics from the more quantitative, skills based disciplines, which emphasise the acquisition of measurable skills and knowledge related to highly specific learning outcomes (e.g. Engineering, Computing and Accounting) appear to have less difficulty judging the relative standards and equivalence of courses.
In the Arts and Social Sciences, credit transfer applications fit less neatly into standardised arrangements. Two faculties, recognising that a large number of credit transfer decisions will ultimately be made by individuals and will always be, to some degree, subjective, have begun codifying credit transfer and recognition of prior learning decisions in a schedule of precedents, in an effort to ensure that decisions are consistent and fair.
The project has raised a number of problems with the recording of basis of admission and credit transfer data, which the project team believes are probably not confined to the University of South Australia and should be investigated and addressed both internally and on a system wide basis.
There is a strong commitment at the senior leadership level to the principles of credit transfer and recognition of prior learning. However, this commitment is not yet reflected across the wider University community. In particular, the project’s findings suggest that there is a greater degree of acceptance of the principle of recognition of prior credentialled learning than of uncredentialled learning.
The major recommendations are:
Recommendation 1
The University to develop a communications strategy to ensure that its staff are fully informed of University policy on credit transfer and recognition of prior learning and the principles which underlie this policy framework. This communications strategy to be accompanied by a professional development program designed specifically for course coordinators and other course advisers, and key administrative staff in faculties.
Recommendation 2
Emphasis to be placed on the dissemination of information to both prospective and enrolling students on credit transfer and recognition of prior learning opportunities, in particular, the accessibility of up to date information online.
Recommendation 3
Faculties to develop clear, comprehensive and user friendly statements on local arrangements for credit transfer and recognition of prior learning which are readily available, including online.
Recommendation 4
The University to develop a communications strategy targeting secondary schools in order to provide secondary students with clear information on credit transfer opportunities and the range of alternative pathways to study at University.
Recommendation 5
Information on credit transfer and recognition of prior learning opportunities to be included with all offers to students, encouraging applications and referring students to nominated officers (or a specific Web site) for further information.
Recommendation 6
Faculties to be more flexible with the granting of credit outside formal arrangements and investigate opportunities for students to have their prior learning experiences recognised, including electives and Broadening Undergraduate Education (BUGE) subjects.
Recommendation 7
Continue the work of the Recognition of Prior Learning Working Party in facilitating the assessment of applications for recognition of prior learning for entry and credit.
Recommendation 8
The University to review its admissions procedures and, in particular, the application of entry subquotas at the faculty level to ensure that they encourage and facilitate cross-sectoral linkages.
Recommendation 9
TAFE: University liaison groups to maintain regular cross-sectoral involvement in course planning, development and review processes across both organisations.
Recommendation 10
The University’s policy and procedures for course development and review to incorporate consideration of credit transfer arrangements and to include cross-sectoral membership of course planning committees.
Recommendation 11
All course documentation to incorporate details of credit transfer/articulation arrangements with TAFE, other providers in the vocational education and training sector and, where possible, examples of uncredentialled recognition of prior learning arrangements.
Recommendation 12
The University to review the definitions used in collecting and recording data on basis of admission and credit transfer procedures to ensure accurate recording of information.
Recommendation 13
The definitions and procedures for recording basis of admission, credit transfer and recognition of prior learning data to be reviewed and clarified across the higher education system.